Glottal fry and voice disguise: a case study in forensic phonetics

Hirson, Allen; Duckworth, Martin

doi:10.1016/0141-5425(93)90115-f

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When interference such as laughter, overlapping speech from the interlocutor, or background noise showed up in the signal, tokens were excluded. Fricative tokens occurring in context with a creaky phonation were not excluded, as previous research has shown that /s/ spectra are relatively stable against creakiness (Hirson & Duckworth, 1993). Tokens were labelled as onsets Labiodental consonants /f, v, ʋ/ were not coded as labial because the teeth-to-lip movement in these sounds does not involve lip-rounding or closure, but rather eliminates the anterior cavity and can therefore not be assumed to have the same lowering effect on the spectrum.…”

Section: A Corpus and Speakersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The distribution of speaker information in Dutch fricatives /s/ and /x/ from telephone dialogues

Smorenburg

Heeren

2020

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although previous work has shown that some speech sounds contain more speaker-dependent information than others, not much is known about the speaker information of the same segment in different linguistic contexts. The present study therefore investigated whether Dutch fricatives /s/ and /x/ from telephone dialogues contain differential speaker information as a function of syllabic position and labial co-articulation. These linguistic effects, established in earlier work on read broadband speech, were firstly investigated. Using a corpus of Dutch telephone speech, results showed that the telephone bandwidth captures the expected effects of perseverative and anticipatory labialization for back fricative /x/, for which spectral peaks fall within the telephone band, but not for front fricative /s/, for which the spectral peak falls outside the telephone band.Multinomial logistic regression shows that /s/ contains slightly more speaker information than /x/ in telephone speech and that speaker information is distributed across the speech signal in a systematic way; even though differences in classification accuracy were small, for both /s/ and /x/, codas and tokens with labial neighbours are more speaker-specific than onsets and tokens with non-labial neighbours. These findings indicate that speaker information contained by the same speech sound is not the same across contexts.

show abstract

Section: A Corpus and Speakersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The distribution of speaker information in Dutch fricatives /s/ and /x/ from telephone dialogues

Smorenburg

Heeren

2020

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we must stress that speech sounds are also widely investigated in other fields such as speaker recognition (Shannon et al 1989;Kingsbury et al 1998;Bielińska 2002) and verification (Furui 1981;Petry and Barone 2002;Lung 2006), forensic speech investigations (Hirson 1993), communication problems and so on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative measurement of speech sound distortions with the aid of minimum variance spectral estimation method for dentistry use

Bereteu

Drăgănescu

Stanescu

et al. 2011

Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In forensic contexts, for example, an earwitness's ability to identify a person from a voice lineup diminishes when vocal variability is introduced. Listeners often fail to reliably discriminate between talkers when exposed to voices disguised using falsetto, hyponasality, creaky voice, or whispering (Hirson and Duckworth, 1993;LaRiviere, 1975;Reich and Duke, 1979;Reich et al, 2005;Wagner and Köster, 1999); and changes in a speaker's emotional state substantially impair listeners' abilities to recognize Saslove and Yarmey 1980;cf. Read and Craik 1995) or discriminate among talkers (Lavan et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic voice variation within and between speakers

Lee

Keating

Kreiman

2019

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about the nature or extent of everyday variability in voice quality. This paper describes a series of principal component analyses to explore within-and between-talker acoustic variation and the extent to which they conform to expectations derived from current models of voice perception. Based on studies of faces and cognitive models of speaker recognition, we hypothesized that a few measures would be important across speakers, but that much of within-speaker variability would be idiosyncratic. Analyses used multiple sentence productions from fifty female and fifty male speakers of English, recorded over three days. Twenty-six acoustic variables from a psychoacoustic model of voice quality were measured every 5 ms on vowels and approximants. Across speakers the balance between higher harmonic amplitudes and inharmonic energy in the voice accounted for the most variance (fe-males=20%, males=22%). Formant frequencies and their variability accounted for an additional 12% of variance across speakers. Remaining variance appeared largely idiosyncratic, suggesting that the speaker-specific voice space is different for different people. Results further showed that voice spaces for individuals and for the population of talkers have very similar acoustic structures. Implications for prototype models of voice perception and recognition are discussed.

show abstract

Glottal fry and voice disguise: a case study in forensic phonetics

Cited by 19 publications

References 6 publications

The distribution of speaker information in Dutch fricatives /s/ and /x/ from telephone dialogues

The distribution of speaker information in Dutch fricatives /s/ and /x/ from telephone dialogues

Quantitative measurement of speech sound distortions with the aid of minimum variance spectral estimation method for dentistry use

Acoustic voice variation within and between speakers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About