Drawing a distinction between familiar and unfamiliar voice processing: A review of neuropsychological, clinical and empirical findings

Stevenage, Sarah V.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.07.005

Cited by 55 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 140 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…mentally rehearsing vocal apparatus movements could fine-tune voice perception). In support of this explanation we can also cite cases of dyslexia (a language disorder in which phonological processing is impaired) characterized by impaired unfamiliar voice recognition ( Perea et al., 2014 ; Stevenage, 2017 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Functional connectivity within the voice perception network and its behavioural relevance

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognizing who is speaking is a cognitive ability characterized by considerable individual differences, which could relate to the inter-individual variability observed in voice-elicited BOLD activity. Since voice perception is sustained by a complex brain network involving temporal voice areas (TVAs) and, even if less consistently, extra-temporal regions such as frontal cortices, functional connectivity (FC) during an fMRI voice localizer (passive listening of voices vs non-voices) has been computed within twelve temporal and frontal voice-sensitive regions (“voice patches”) individually defined for each subject (N = 90) to account for inter-individual variability. Results revealed that voice patches were positively co-activated during voice listening and that they were characterized by different FC pattern depending on the location (anterior/posterior) and the hemisphere. Importantly, FC between right frontal and temporal voice patches was behaviorally relevant: FC significantly increased with voice recognition abilities as measured in a voice recognition test performed outside the scanner. Hence, this study highlights the importance of frontal regions in voice perception and it supports the idea that looking at FC between stimulus-specific and higher-order frontal regions can help understanding individual differences in processing social stimuli such as voices.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Functional connectivity within the voice perception network and its behavioural relevance

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The processing of voices has arguably been shown to be even weaker when voices are unfamiliar than when familiar (see Stevenage, 2018, for a review). At a general level, unfamiliar voices elicit slower sex judgements (Burton & Bonner, 2004), difficulty during speech shadowing or comprehension (Johnsrude et al, 2013;Kreitewolf, Gaudrain, & von Kriegstein, 2014;Levi, Winters, & Pisoni, 2011;Nygaard, Sommers, & Pisoni, 1994;Souza, Gehani, Wright, & McCloy, 2013), and weaker eventrelated potential (ERP) waveforms during expression judgements (Pinheiro et al, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sorting through the impact of familiarity when processing vocal identity: Results from a voice sorting task

Stevenage

Symons

Fletcher

et al. 2019

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article reports on one experiment designed to examine the importance of familiarity when processing vocal identity. A voice sorting task was used with participants who were either personally familiar or unfamiliar with three speakers. The results suggested that familiarity supported both an ability to tell different instances of the same voice together, and to tell similar instances of different voices apart. In addition, the results suggested differences between the three speakers in terms of the extent to which they were confusable, underlining the importance of vocal characteristics and stimulus selection within behavioural tasks. The results are discussed with reference to existing debates regarding the nature of stored representations as familiarity develops, and the difficulty when processing voices over faces more generally.

show abstract

“…Although the original studies make a careful distinction between these task types and note that voice identity perception is likely to rely on a number of different processes and strategies, later research is somewhat less clear on the difference in tasks. Hence, familiar and unfamiliar voice processing in general -independent of tasks -are often seen as entirely distinct processes (see Stevenage, 2018 for a recent review in support of this idea).…”

Section: Combining Hierarchical and Mechanistic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maguinness, Roswandowitz & Von Kriegstein, 2017). Where models account for unfamiliar voices, familiar and unfamiliar voice processing are considered to be qualitatively and mechanistically distinct processes involving recognition and discrimination, respectively (Kreiman & Sidtis, 2011;Sidtis & Kreiman, 2012; Van Lancker & Kreiman, 1987;Stevenage, 2018). Specifically, identity processing for familiar voices is thought to be underpinned by top-down, holistic recognition of diagnostic features, whereas unfamiliar voices are processed primarily through bottom-up acoustic discrimination (although other broader representations may play a role; Kreiman & Sidtis, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A model of person perception from voices

Lavan¹,

McGettigan²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When we hear a voice, we instantly form rich impressions of the person it belongs to -whether we are familiar with this voice or whether we are hearing it for the first time. Despite the rich impressions we can form of both familiar and unfamiliar voices, current models of voice processing primarily focus on familiar voice identity perception only and do not explicitly account for the processing of unfamiliar voices. Where unfamiliar identity processing is described, it tends to be in the context of specific identity perception tasks, such that the extant literature is largely built on a distinction between familiar voice recognition and unfamiliar voice discrimination. We argue that the current focus of the literature is too narrow in its strong emphasis on identity-specific perception, and does not adequately reflect person perception from voices beyond experimental tasks. Here, we propose a broader, unified account of person perception from both familiar and unfamiliar voices. We suggest that listeners routinely perceive all person characteristics from voices via common recognition processes, based on representations -be those of a specific identity, speaker sex, accent, or a perceived personality trait. While explicit discrimination processes may still be used to disambiguate percepts, they are likely to play a smaller role in perception in naturalistic settings. We offer discussions of how this representation-centred person perception from voices may work, in terms of the nature of representations, their specificity and interactions of different kinds of representation.

show abstract

Drawing a distinction between familiar and unfamiliar voice processing: A review of neuropsychological, clinical and empirical findings

Cited by 55 publications

References 140 publications

Functional connectivity within the voice perception network and its behavioural relevance

Functional connectivity within the voice perception network and its behavioural relevance

Sorting through the impact of familiarity when processing vocal identity: Results from a voice sorting task

A model of person perception from voices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About