Perceptions of familiar and unfamiliar ear- and eyewitnesses

Harvey, Madison B.; Bruer, Kaila C.; Price, Heather L.

doi:10.1080/13218719.2021.1910588

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While these cues are weaker and less informative than faces (Hanley & Damjanovic, 2009; Stevenage et al, 2013), speech obtained from a criminal suspect can be submitted as forensic evidence in a court of law (Edmond et al, 2011; McGorrery & McMahon, 2017; Robson, 2017). Within the context of policing and the criminal justice system, listeners are likely to be unfamiliar with the target identity, and must rely on memory (e.g., from a crime scene interaction; Harvey et al, 2021) or perceptual matching ability (i.e., deciding whether two voices can be attributed to a common identity; Mullikin & Rahman, 2010; Smith et al, 2019, 2020), to accurately identify a voice. However, research on similar processes in unfamiliar face identification have shown that such judgements are prone to error (see Young & Burton, 2018), and several studies suggest that accurately judging the identity of unfamiliar voices might be even more problematic (see Lavan, Burton, et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

Sunilkumar

Kelly

Stevenage

et al. 2023

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In several applied contexts (e.g., earwitness testimony), the accurate recognition of unfamiliar voices can be a critical part of the person identification process. However, recognising unfamiliar voices is prone to error. While such errors could be reduced by testing the proficiency of listeners, the established tests of unfamiliar voice matching (BVMT) and memory (GVMT) may be limited by their choice of stimuli (i.e., vowel‐sounds) and their design (i.e., using identical sounds at learning and test; GVMT). Here, we examine whether these sound‐based tests are predictive of performance on more naturalistic speech‐based tasks, and whether performance is consistent across task‐domain (matching/memory) and task‐modality (voices/faces). The findings show that while the BVMT was a robust predictor of speech‐based voice matching, this was not the case for the GVMT and speech‐based voice memory. In addition, we provide evidence for a potential common person recognition factor ‘p’. The theoretical and applied implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

Sunilkumar

Kelly

Stevenage

et al. 2023

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While these cues are weaker and less informative than faces (Hanley & Danjamovic, 2009;Stevenage et al, 2013), speech obtained from a criminal suspect can be submitted as forensic evidence in a court of law (Edmond et al, 2011;McGorry & McMahon, 2017;Robson, 2017). Within the context of policing and the criminal justice system, listeners are likely to be unfamiliar with the target identity, and must rely on memory (e.g., from a crime scene interaction; Harvey et al, 2021) or perceptual matching ability (i.e., deciding whether two voices can be attributed to a common identity; Mullikin & Rahman, 2010;Smith et al, 2019), to accurately identify a voice. However, research on similar processes in unfamiliar face identification have shown that such judgements are prone to error (see , and several studies suggest that accurately judging the identity of unfamiliar voices might be just as problematic (see Lavan et al, 2019a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

Sunilkumar¹,

Kelly²,

Stevenage³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In several applied contexts (e.g., earwitness testimony), the accurate recognition of unfamiliar voices can be a critical part of the person identification process. However, recognising unfamiliar voices is prone to error. While such errors could be reduced by testing the proficiency of listeners, the established tests of unfamiliar voice matching (BVMT) and memory (GVMT) may be limited by their choice of stimuli (i.e., vowel-sounds) and their design (i.e., using identical sounds at learning and test; GVMT). Here, we examine whether these sound-based tests are predictive of performance on more naturalistic speech-based tasks, and whether performance is consistent across task-domain (matching/memory) and task-modality (voices/faces). The findings show that while the BVMT was a robust predictor of speech-based voice matching, this was not the case for the GVMT and speech-based voice memory. In addition, we provide evidence for a potential common person recognition factor ‘p’. The theoretical and applied implications are discussed.

show abstract

A meta-analysis on study and sample characteristics modulating mock earwitness performance

Leue,

Wichert

2024

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptions of familiar and unfamiliar ear- and eyewitnesses

Cited by 3 publications

References 23 publications

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

Sounds and speech: Individual differences in unfamiliar voice recognition

A meta-analysis on study and sample characteristics modulating mock earwitness performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About