Abstract
Vocal expressions of emotions taken from a recorded version of a play were content. masked by using electronic filtering, randomized splicing and a combination of both techniques in addition to a no-treatment condition in a 2×2 design. Untrained listener-judges rated the voice samples in the four conditions on 20 semantic differential scales. Irrespective of the severe reduction in the number and types of vocal cues in the masking conditions, the mean ratings of the judges in all four groups agreed on a level significantly beyond chance expectations on the differential position of the emotional expressions in a multidimensional space of emotional meaning. The results suggest that a minimal set of vocal cues consisting of pitch level and variation, amplitude level and variation, and rate of articulation may be sufficient to communicate the evaluation, potency, and activity dimensions of emotional meaning. Each of these dimensions may be associated with a specific pattern of vocal cues or cue combinations. No differential effects of the type of content-masking for specific emotions were found. Systematic effects of the masking techniques consisted in a lowering of the perceived activity level of the emotions in the case of electronic filtering, and more positive ratings on the evaluative dimension in the case of randomized splicing. Electronic filtering tended to decrease, randomized splicing tended to increase inter-rater reliability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abercrombie, D. (1969). Voice qualities. In N. N. Markel (ed.),Psycholinguistics, Dorsey, Homewood, Ill.
Addington, D. W. (1968). Voice and the perception of personality: An experimental study. Oklahoma State University Monographs,Social Sciences Series, No. 15.
Constanzo, F. S., Markel, N. N. and Constanzo, P. R. (1969). Voice quality profile and perceived emotion.J. Counsel. Psychol. 16: 267–270.
Davitz, J. R. (1964).The Communication of Emotional Meaning. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Dusenberry, D. and Knower, F. H. (1939). Experimental studies of the symbolism of action and voice. II. A Study of the specificity of meaning in abstract tonal symbols.Quart. J. Speech 25: 67–75.
Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of non-verbal behavior: Origins, usage, coding, and categories.Semiotica 1: 49–98.
Fairbanks, G., and Hoaglin, L. W. (1941). An experimental study of the durational characteristics of the voice during expressions of emotions.Speech Monographs 8: 85–90.
Friedhoff, A. J., Alpert, M., and Kurtzberg, R. L. (1964). Infra-content channels of vocal communication. InDisorders of Communication, Vol. XLII: Research Publications, A.R.N.M.D.
Knower, F. H. (1941). Analysis of some experimental variations of simulated vocal expressions of the emotions.J. Soc. Psychol. 14: 369–372.
Kramer, E. (1963a). The judgment of personal characteristics and emotions from nonverbal properties of speech.Psychol. Bull. 60: 408–420.
Kramer, E. (1963b). Judgment of portrayed emotion from normal English, filtered English, and Japanese speech.Diss. Abstr. 24: 1699–1700.
Kramer, E. (1964). Elimination of verbal cues in judgments of emotion from voice.J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 68: 390–396.
Licklider, J. C. R., and Miller, G. A. (1951). The perception of speech. In S. S. Stevens (ed.),Handbook of Experimental Psychology, Wiley, New York, pp. 1040–1074.
Mahl, G. F. (1964). Some observations about research on vocal behavior. In D. McK. Rioch (ed.),Disorders of Communication, Proceedings of ARNMD, Vol. 42, William & Wilkins, Baltimore.
Mehrabian, A. (1970). When are feelings communicated inconsistently?J. Exptl. Res. Person. 4: 198–212.
Milmoe, S., Rosenthal, R., Blane, H., Chafetz, M., and Wolf, I. (1967). The doctor's voice: Postdictor of successful referral of alcoholic patients.J. Abnorm. Psychol. 72: 78–84.
Osgood, C. E., Suci, G., and Tannenbaum, P. (1957).The Measurement of Meaning. Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill.
Ostwald, P. F. (1963). Soundmaking: The acoustic communication of emotion. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Ill.
Pollack, I., Rubenstein, H., and Horowitz, A. (1960). Communication of verbal modes of expression.Lang. and Speech 3: 121–130.
Rogers, P. L., Scherer, K. R., and Rosenthal, R. (1971). Content-filtering human speech.Behav. Res. Methods Instrumentation 3: 16–18.
Ruckmick, C. A. (1936). The psychology of feeling and emotion. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Scherer, K. R. (1971). Randomized-splicing: A note on a simple technique for masking speech content.J. Exptl. Res. Personality 5: 155–159.
Scherer, K. R., London, H., and Wolf, J. J. (1971a). The voice of confidence: Paralinguistic cues and audience evaluation. Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University.
Scherer, K. R., Rosenthal, R., and Koivumaki, J. (1971b). Mediation of experimenter expectancy effect via differential speech intensity in instruction reading. Paper read at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York, N.Y., April 1971.
Soskin, W. F., and Kauffman, P. E. (1961). Judgment of emotion in word-free voice samples.J. Communication 11: 73–80.
Starkweather, J. A. (1956). The communication value of content-free speech.Amer. J. Psychol. 69: 121–123.
Starkweather, J. A. (1967). Vocal behavior as an information channel of speaker status. In Salzinger, K., and Salzinger, S. (eds.),Research in Verbal Behavior and Some Neurophysiological Implications, Academic Press, New York, pp. 253–262.
Udall, E. (1960). Attitudinal meanings conveyed by intonation contours.Lang. and Speech 3: 223–234.
Vetter, H. J. (1969).Language Behavior and Communication. Peacock, Itasca, Ill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a research grant (GS-2654) from the Division of Social Sciences of the National Science Foundation to Robert Rosenthal.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Scherer, K.R., Koivumaki, J. & Rosenthal, R. Minimal cues in the vocal communication of affect: Judging emotions from content-masked speech. J Psycholinguist Res 1, 269–285 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074443
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074443