Page 14 - Fall 2011
P. 14

alistic; yet dismissal or rejection of all but a few characteris- tics holds little promise of explaining voice perception. It has become obvious in inspecting the array of potential cues that not all will pertain to the successful perception of a given voice pattern. Instead, some emerge as decisive to perception of a pattern, and most will be irrelevant. Drawing on the perspective that individual voice pat- terns are singular and unique, we propose a model of voice perception that allows for interplay between characteristics or features and the signature voice pattern. Our model is based in the interactivity of voices and listeners in all of voice perception, and takes into account three continua—the rela- tive contributions of feature and pattern recognition process- es to recognition or perception of different sorts of voice pat- terns; differences in the neurological and psychological status of familiar and unfamiliar voices; and left versus right cere- bral hemisphere processing and the contributions of subcor- tical systems in the brain. Perception of the myriad vocal characteristics communicating physical and personality cues, mood, emotion, attitude, background and so on is likely to differ significantly with the relationship of the voice to the listener—that is, its status as familiar or unfamiliar. While deconstruction of neutral voice samples will yield fascinating details about acoustic structure, it is taking on the challenge of the talker-listener interaction with a personally familiar voice pattern and its complex indices of information that will lead to fruitful studies of this immense natural endowment. Acknowledgments Some of the research described in this paper was sup- ported by grant DC01797 from the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. Software used in analysis-by-synthesis can be freely downloaded from References Apicella, C. L. and Feinberg, D. R. (2008). “Voice pitch alters mate- choice-relevant perception in hunter-gatherers," Proc. Biol. Sci. 276, 1077–1082. Austin, G. (1806) Chironomia (Cadell and Davies, London). Reprinted by Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL, 1996. Bahrick, H., Bahrick, P., and Wittlinger, R. (1975). “Fifty years of memory for names and faces: A cross-sectional approach,” J. Experimental Psychol.: General 104, 54–75. Bee, M. A., and Gerhardt, H. C. (2002). “Individual voice recogni- tion in a territorial frog (Rana catesbeiana),” Proc. Royal Society of London B: Biological Sci. 269, 1443–1448. Belin, P., and Grosbras, M. H. (2010). “Before speech: Cerebral voice processing in infants,” Neuron 65, 733–735. Belin, P., Zatorre, R. J., Lafaille, P., Ahad, P., and Pike, B. (2000). “Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex,” Nature 403, 309–312. Berg, K. S., Delgado, S., Okawa, R., Beissinger, S. R., and Bradbury, J. W. (2011). “Contact calls are used for individual mate recogni- tion in free-ranging green-rumped parrotlets, Forpus passeri- nus,” Animal Behaviour 81, 241–248. Berlin, I. (1953; 1994). The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy’s View of History (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London). Reprinted in Russian Thinkers (Penguin, Oxford). Bestelmeyer, P., Rouger, J., DeBruine, L. M., and Belin, P. (2010). “Auditory adaptation in vocal affect perception,” Cognition 117, 217–223. Bricker, P. D., and. and Pruzansky, S. (1976). “Speaker recognition,” in Contemporary Issues in Experimental Phonetics, edited by N. J. Lass, (Academic, New York), pp. 295–326. Burke, E. J., and Murphy, C. G. (2007). “How female barking tree frogs, Hyla gratiosa, use multiple call characteristics to select a mate,” Animal Behaviour 74, 1463–1472. Charlton, B. D., Reby, D., and McComb, K. (2007). “Female percep- tion of size-related formant shifts in red deer, Cervus elaphus,” Animal Behaviour 74, 707–714. Charrier, I., Mathevon, N., and Jouventin, P. (2001). “Mother’s voice recognition by seal pups,” Nature 412, 873. Cheney, D. L., and Seyfarth, R. M. (1980). “Vocal recognition in free-ranging vervet monkeys,” Animal Behaviour 28, 362–367. Cheney, D. L., and Seyfarth, R. M. (1999). “Recognition of other individuals’ social relationships by female baboons,” Animal Behaviour 58, 67–75. Fenn, K. M., Shintel, H., Atkins, A. S., Skipper, J. I., Bond, V. C., and Nusbaum, H. C. (2011). “When less is heard than meets the ear: Change deafness in a telephone conversation,” Quarterly J. Experimental Psychol. 64, 1442–1456. Fuchs, T., Iacobucci, P., MacKinnon, K. M., and Panksepp, J. (2010). “Infant-mother recognition in a social rodent (Octodon degust),” J. Comparative Psychol. 124, 166–175. Gainotti, G. (2011). “What the study of voice recognition in normal subjects and brain-damaged patients tells us about models of familiar people recognition,” Neuropsychologia 49, 2273–2282. Gelfer, M. P. (1988). “Perceptual attributes of voice: Development and use of rating scales,” J. Voice 2, 320–326. Gerratt, B. R., and Kreiman, J. (2001). “Measuring vocal quality with speech synthesis,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 110, 2560–2566. Gerratt, B. R., Kreiman, J., Antoñanzas-Barroso, N., and Berke, G. (1993). “Comparing internal and external standards in voice quality judgments,” J. Speech and Hearing Res. 36, 14–20. Goldman, J. A., Phillips, D. P., and Fentress, J. C. (1995). “An acoustic basis for maternal recognition in timber wolves (Canis lupus)?,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97, 1970–1973. Gould, S. J. (2003). The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox: Mending the Gap Between Science and the Humanities (Harmony, New York). Grossmann, T., Oberecker, R., Koch, S. P., and Friederici, A. D. (2010). “The developmental origins of voice processing in the human brain,” Neuron 65, 852–858. Hardouin, L. A., Bretagnolle, V., Tabel, P., Bavoux, C., Burneleau, G., and Reby, D. (2009). “Acoustic cues to reproductive success in male owl hoots,” Animal Behaviour 78, 907–913. Insley, S. J. (2001). “Mother-offspring vocal recognition in northern fur seals is mutual but asymmetrical,” Animal Behaviour 61, 129–137. Isshiki, N., Okamura, H., Tanabe, M., and Morimoto, M. (1969). “Differential diagnosis of hoarseness,” Folia Phoniatrica 21, 9–19. Jouventin, P., and Aubin, T. (2002). “Acoustic systems are adapted to breeding ecologies: Individual recognition in nesting penguins,” Animal Behaviour 64, 747–757. Kempster, G. B., Gerratt, B. R., Verdolini-Abbott, K., Barkmeier- Kraemer, J. M., and Hillman, R. E. (2009). “Consensus auditory- perceptual evaluation of voice: Development of a standardized clinical protocol,” Am. J. Speech Language Pathol. 18, 124–132. Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M. J., Lee, K., Xie, X., Huang, H., Ye, H. H., Zhang, K., and Wang, Z. (2003). “Effects of experience on Voices and Listeners 13 

   12   13   14   15   16