2023
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1101187
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the speaker discriminatory power asymmetry regarding acoustic-phonetic parameters and the impact of speaking style

Abstract: This study aimed to assess what we refer to as the speaker discriminatory power asymmetry and its forensic implications in comparisons performed in different speaking styles: spontaneous dialogues vs. interviews. We also addressed the impact of data sampling on the speaker's discriminatory performance concerning different acoustic-phonetic estimates. The participants were 20 male speakers, Brazilian Portuguese speakers from the same dialectal area. The speech material consisted of spontaneous telephone convers… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 30 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While the research by Cavalcanti et al (2021aCavalcanti et al ( ,b, 2022Cavalcanti et al ( , 2023) predominantly focused on analyzing male voices, limiting broader generalizations, studies incorporating more representative samples of both sexes suggest that the elevated similarity among twin subjects, in contrast to unrelated subjects, is not exclusive to a specific gender group (cf. Przybyla et al, 1992;Nolan and Oh, 1996;Van Lierde et al, 2005;Weirich, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the research by Cavalcanti et al (2021aCavalcanti et al ( ,b, 2022Cavalcanti et al ( , 2023) predominantly focused on analyzing male voices, limiting broader generalizations, studies incorporating more representative samples of both sexes suggest that the elevated similarity among twin subjects, in contrast to unrelated subjects, is not exclusive to a specific gender group (cf. Przybyla et al, 1992;Nolan and Oh, 1996;Van Lierde et al, 2005;Weirich, 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%