Response to Mueller, Larson, and Summers We appreciate the comments of Mueller, Larson, and Summers on our recent article, “The Voiced/Voiceless Phonation Time in Children With and Without Laryngeal Pathology” (Sorensen & Parker, 1992). Mueller, Larson, and Summers provide information about the effect of procedural variations in obtaining the s/z ratio, as well as information ... Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor  |   July 01, 1993
Response to Mueller, Larson, and Summers
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • David N. Sorensen
    Idaho State University, Pocatello
  • Pamela Ann Parker
    Idaho State University, Pocatello
Article Information
Speech, Voice & Prosody / Letters to the Editor
Letter to the Editor   |   July 01, 1993
Response to Mueller, Larson, and Summers
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 1993, Vol. 24, 178-179. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2403.178
History: Received April 23, 1992 , Accepted November 23, 1992
 
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, July 1993, Vol. 24, 178-179. doi:10.1044/0161-1461.2403.178
History: Received April 23, 1992; Accepted November 23, 1992
We appreciate the comments of Mueller, Larson, and Summers on our recent article, “The Voiced/Voiceless Phonation Time in Children With and Without Laryngeal Pathology” (Sorensen & Parker, 1992). Mueller, Larson, and Summers provide information about the effect of procedural variations in obtaining the s/z ratio, as well as information on a large sample of kindergarten children. In two previous studies, Larson, Mueller, and Summers (1990, 1991) found that the order in which /s/ and /z/ are presented, the number of required trials, and the selection of /s/ and /z/ values utilized to calculate the ratio did not yield significant differences in the calculated s/z ratios.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access