What influences the conflict in theories of intonation according to various studies?

The methodologies used to measure fundamental frequency (Fo) changes significantly influence the conflict in theories of intonation. Different research methods can yield varying results because they may affect how intonation is perceived and analyzed. For instance, some methodologies may rely heavily on acoustic analysis, while others may use perceptual analyses or different technological tools for measurement. These variations can lead to discrepancies in the data interpretation regarding how intonation operates across different contexts, speakers, or languages.

Moreover, the choice of methodology can literally shape the data gathered, leading to differing conclusions about intonation's function across languages or within specific speech contexts. Thus, understanding how these methodologies impact intonation studies is crucial for reconciling the conflicts that arise within various theoretical frameworks. This highlights the importance of standardization in research practices and the need for replication of results across different methodologies to deepen the understanding of intonation in speech science.