What Makes Business Speakers Sound Charismatic? – A Contrastive Acoustic-Melodic Analysis of Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg
Source: @niebuhr2020
Highlights 💡
Hinzugefügt am 2022-09-27
■ acoustic analysis of about 1,350 prosodic phrases from keynotes given by a more charismatic CEO (Steve Jobs) and a less charismatic CEO (Mark Zuckerberg) (p. 1)
■ charisma as an aspect of personality. (p. 3)
■ Vergauwe et al. (2017) describe charisma as a specific personality-trait setting. (p. 3)
■ In an alternative line of thought charisma is described as attributional rather than a matter of personality. (p. 3)
■ Antonakis et al. (2016) amongst others, this line of thought bears the risk of circular reasoning in that the description of charisma relies on its effects, which, in turn, substantiate its description. (p. 3)
■ , Antonakis et al. (2016, p. 304) describe charisma as an attribution to a specific communication style that is inherent to charismatic speakers and defined as “values-based, symbolic, and emotion-laden, leader” signals. (p. 3)
■ passion, commitment and captivation or, in short, some sort of emotional involvement (p. 3)
■ d emotional contagion (BONO; ILIES, 2006; BARSADE et al., 2018). (p. 3)
■ Biadsy et al. (2008) (p. 5)
■ Hiroyuki and Rathcke (2016), (p. 5)
■ Bosker (2017) (p. 5)
■ Strangert and Gustafson (2008), D’Errico et al. (2013), (p. 5)
■ Jokisch et al. (2018). (p. 5)
■ charismatic speech was found to show an elevated rather than a lowered fundamental frequency (f0) level as well as higher levels of vocal effort and intensity (p. 5)
■ more variability in charismatic speech, for example, manifesting itself in a larger f0 range (p. 5)
■ greater acoustic-energy dynamics (p. 5)
■ partition their speech into smaller pieces (p. 5)
■ We assume that MZ shows about average or slightly above average public-speaking skills. (p. 7)
■ de-lexicalized the stimuli by low-pass filtering them at 600 Hz, (p. 8)
■ 93 participants (p. 9)
■ management and leadership differences were clearly pronounced and statistically significant (p. 9)
■ 22 minutes of speech data, or about 12,000 individual speech sounds and 692 prosodic phrases (p. 11)
■ In the case of MZ, all speech samples were extracted from his keynotes at Facebook’s “F8” events (cf. RUSLI, 2014). “F8” is Facebook’s annual conference. (p. 11)
■ forum for highlighting milestones, advertising new features, and announcing the company’s future plans (p. 11)
■
■ 21 minutes for acoustic analysis, consisting of about 13,700 speech sounds and 536 prosodic phrases. (p. 12)
■ uncompressed WAV format with a sampling rate of 48 kHz and a 16-bit quantization (p. 12)
■ we first identified the prosodic phrases (i.e., all coherent parts of speech in between two audible breaks, see the well-established “breath group” definition of Jones (1918) as well as modern concepts of phrasal annotation; JUN, 2005) in a subsample (p. 14)
■ Intended silent pauses were represented by the label
. All other non-verbal vocalization signals counted as disfluencies and were represented by the label
. (p. 14)
■ WebMAUS (see STRUNK; SCHIEL; SEIFART, 2014) was used to create the additional annotation level of individual sound segments. (p. 15)
■ The scripts were based on an analysis window of 40 milliseconds that was shifted in constant intervals of 10 milliseconds through the respective prosodic phrase. (p. 15)
■
■ The TextGrid files for the customerand investor-related sound files for both speakers can be downloaded here: 10.5281/zenodo.1187140 (p. 34)
■ Plinio Barbosa, Yi Xu, Eric Doty, Mietta Lennes, and Matthew Winn for publishing their scripts (p. 34)