Highlights @signorello2020

Highlights 💡: Vocal Fundamental Frequency and Sound Pressure Level in Charismatic Speech §

Source: @signorello2020

Hinzugefügt am 2022-11-06

■ investigates voice fundamental frequency (f0) and sound pressure level (SPL) in female and male French, Italian, Brazilian, and American politicians (p. 1)

■ investigates voice fundamental frequency (f0) and sound pressure level (SPL) in female and male French, Italian, Brazilian, and American politicians (p. 1)

■ Patterns of f0 manipulation were shared across genders and cultures, suggesting this dimension might be biologically based and is exploited by leaders to convey dominance. (p. 1)

■ Patterns of f0 manipulation were shared across genders and cultures, suggesting this dimension might be biologically based and is exploited by leaders to convey dominance. (p. 1)

■ vision, emotions, and dominance, that leaders use to share beliefs and achieve goals (p. 2)

■ vision, emotions, and dominance, that leaders use to share beliefs and achieve goals (p. 2)

■ “charisma of the mind”—verbal behaviors that convey the strength of the leaders’ ideas and visions, expressed through spoken words and written texts—and/or through “charisma of the body,” the non-verbal behaviors (voice, facial expression, gesture, posture, etc.) (p. 2)

■ “charisma of the mind”—verbal behaviors that convey the strength of the leaders’ ideas and visions, expressed through spoken words and written texts—and/or through “charisma of the body,” the non-verbal behaviors (voice, facial expression, gesture, posture, etc.) (p. 2)

■ Speakers directly manipulate the acoustical patterns of their speech to convey different traits across communicative contexts (environmental acoustics, audience’s social status, gender, and age [11]). (p. 2)

■ f0 depends in part on learned factors (p. 2)

■ voice quality shared by a given group of speakers (p. 2)

■ anatomy (p. 2)

■ physiology (p. 2)

■ can reliably signal physical size (p. 2)

■ emotional state [30,31], personality [7], sex [32], age [21], attractiveness [33,34], and threat potential [19], in addition to leadership status [17,35,36] (p. 2)

■ SPL is the primary acoustic correlate of perceived loudness (p. 3)

■ related to prosodic features, such as pauses in utterances, articulatory changes, and word stress [28] (p. 3)

■ Three communicative contexts (p. 3)

■ monologue addressed to followers in a formal campaign context (p. 3)

■ monologue addressed to other politicians at a formal conference (p. 3)

■ informal face-to-face interview (p. 3)

■ we hypothesized that all speakers, regardless of gender and language spoken, would use lower mean f0…to convey dominant charisma…audience of their peers (p. 3)

■ narrower ranges of f0 and SPL (p. 3)

■ higher f0, with wider f0 and SPL ranges, when addressing listeners of lower status (p. 3)

■ Speakers were selected through surveys (p. 4)

■ 170 participants (American-English native speakers; 120 females, 50 males; average age 21.96 y.o.) generated lists of adjectives (p. 4)

■ the 68 most-frequently occurring responses were selected (p. 4)

■ corresponded to 5 dimensions of charisma: empathy, competence, benevolence, dominance, and ability to induce emotions (p. 4)

■ proactive-seductive (p. 4)

■ benevolent-competent (p. 4)

■ authoritarianthreatening (p. 4)

■ two female American English (p. 4)

■ three male American English (p. 4)

■ two male Italian (p. 4)

■ two male French (p. 4)

■ two male Brazilian Portuguese (p. 4)

■ speakers used the highest mean f0s in the monologues (p. 6)

■ intermediate (161 Hz; SD = 26 Hz) in the conference context (p. 6)

■ lowest (126 Hz; SD = 23) in the context of a dyadic interview (p. 6)

■ Previous experiments [40,49,60] demonstrated that increasing f0 and f0 variability arouses listeners’ emotions while conveying charisma types in a way that matches the diverse expectations of a large group of listeners (p. 8)

■ Higher f0 and larger f0 variations appear to emphasize the speakers’ social status (p. 8)

■ subtle integration between cross-language abilities and culture-/language-specific strategies (p. 10)

■ adaptation to contexts of communication and time (p. 10)

■ exploitation of voice in terms of vocal fundamental frequency and loudness range (p. 10)

■ from different languages and cultures involved in the same context of communication (p. 10)

■ [10]. Mohammadi G, Mortillaro M, Vinciarelli A, The Voice of Personality: Mapping Nonverbal Vocal Behavior into Trait Attributions, in: Int. Work. Soc. Signal Process, 2010: pp. 17–20. (p. 11)

■ [10]. Mohammadi G, Mortillaro M, Vinciarelli A, The Voice of Personality: Mapping Nonverbal Vocal Behavior into Trait Attributions, in: Int. Work. Soc. Signal Process, 2010: pp. 17–20. (p. 11)

■ investigates voice fundamental frequency (f0) and sound pressure level (SPL) in female and male French, Italian, Brazilian, and American politicians (p. 1)

■ Patterns of f0 manipulation were shared across genders and cultures, suggesting this dimension might be biologically based and is exploited by leaders to convey dominance. (p. 1)

■ vision, emotions, and dominance, that leaders use to share beliefs and achieve goals (p. 2)

■ “charisma of the mind”—verbal behaviors that convey the strength of the leaders’ ideas and visions, expressed through spoken words and written texts—and/or through “charisma of the body,” the non-verbal behaviors (voice, facial expression, gesture, posture, etc.) (p. 2)

■ Speakers directly manipulate the acoustical patterns of their speech to convey different traits across communicative contexts (environmental acoustics, audience’s social status, gender, and age [11]). (p. 2)

■ f0 depends in part on learned factors (p. 2)

■ voice quality shared by a given group of speakers (p. 2)

■ s anatomy (p. 2)

■ physiology (p. 2)

■ can reliably signal physical size (p. 2)

■ s emotional state [30,31], personality [7], sex [32], age [21], attractiveness [33,34], and threat potential [19], in addition to leadership status [17,35,36] (p. 2)

■ SPL is the primary acoustic correlate of perceived loudness, (p. 3)

■ related to prosodic features, such as pauses in utterances, articulatory changes, and word stress [28]. (p. 3)

■ Three communicative contexts (p. 3)

■ monologue addressed to followers in a formal campaign context (p. 3)

■ monologue addressed to other politicians at a formal conference (p. 3)

■ informal face-to-face interview (p. 3)

■ we hypothesized that all speakers, regardless of gender and language spoken, would use lower mean f0…to convey dominant charisma…audience of their peers (p. 3)

■ narrower ranges of f0 and SPL (p. 3)

■ higher f0, with wider f0 and SPL ranges, when addressing listeners of lower status (p. 3)

■ Speakers were selected through surveys (p. 4)

■ 170 participants (American-English native speakers; 120 females, 50 males; average age 21.96 y.o.) generated lists of adjectives (p. 4)

■ the 68 most-frequently occurring responses were selected. (p. 4)

■ corresponded to 5 dimensions of charisma: empathy, competence, benevolence, dominance, and ability to induce emotions. (p. 4)

■ proactive-seductive (p. 4)

■ , benevolent-competent (p. 4)

■ d authoritarianthreatening (p. 4)

■ two female American English (p. 4)

■ three male American English (p. 4)

■ two male Italian (p. 4)

■ two male French (p. 4)

■ two male Brazilian Portuguese (p. 4)

■ speakers used the highest mean f0s in the monologues, (p. 6)

■ intermediate (161 Hz; SD = 26 Hz) in the conference context, (p. 6)

■ lowest (126 Hz; SD = 23) in the context of a dyadic interview (p. 6)

■ . Previous experiments [40,49,60] demonstrated that increasing f0 and f0 variability arouses listeners’ emotions while conveying charisma types in a way that matches the diverse expectations of a large group of listeners (p. 8)

■ Higher f0 and larger f0 variations appear to emphasize the speakers’ social status (p. 8)

■ subtle integration between cross-language abilities and culture-/language-specific strategies (p. 10)

■ adaptation to contexts of communication and time. (p. 10)

■ exploitation of voice in terms of vocal fundamental frequency and loudness range (p. 10)

■ from different languages and cultures involved in the same context of communication, (p. 10)

■ [10]. Mohammadi G, Mortillaro M, Vinciarelli A, The Voice of Personality: Mapping Nonverbal Vocal Behavior into Trait Attributions, in: Int. Work. Soc. Signal Process, 2010: pp. 17–20. (p. 11)