Two studies explored whether the appropriateness of a speaker’s prosodic style (i.e., pitch, volume, speech rate) affects observers’ judgments of speakers’ and listeners’ competence. Adults and school-aged children watched videos of speakers addressing a listener using prosodic styles that were either appropriate (e.g., adult-directed for an adult listener) or inappropriate (e.g., child-directed for an adult listener). Adults, but not children, awarded higher ratings in some domains of communicative competence to speakers and listeners when a speaker used appropriate prosodic styles.
BermanJ.ChambersC. G.GrahamS. A. (2010). Preschoolers’ appreciation of speaker vocal affect as a cue to referential intent. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 87-99. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.04.012
2.
BoersmaP.WeeninkD. (2016). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.0.17. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/
3.
BryantG. A.BarrettH. C. (2007). Recognizing intentions in infant-directed speech evidence for universals. Psychological Science, 18, 746-751. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01970.x
CooperR. P.AslinR. N. (1990). Preference for infant-directed speech in the first month after birth. Child Development, 61, 1584-1595. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02885.x
6.
De LoozeC.OertelC.RauzyS.CampbellN. (2011). Measuring dynamics of mimicry by means of prosodic cues in conversational speech. Paper presented at the International Conference on Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS), Hong Kong. Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01705525
7.
FeldsteinS.DohmF. A.CrownC. L. (2001). Gender and speech rate in the perception of competence and social attractiveness. Journal of Social Psychology, 141, 785-806. doi:10.1080/00224540109600588
8.
FernaldA.TaeschnerT.DunnJ.PapousekM.de Boysson-BardiesB.FukuiI. (1989). A cross-language study of prosodic modifications in mothers’ and fathers’ speech to preverbal infants. Journal of Child Language, 16, 477-501. doi:10.1017/S0305000900010679
9.
FilipovicJ. (2016, September27). Actually, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump at his own game: mansplaining. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com
10.
FowlerK. A.LilienfeldS. O.PatrickC. J. (2009). Detecting psychopathology from thin slices of behavior. Psychological Assessment, 21, 68-78. doi:10.1037/a0014938
11.
FriedmanJ. N. W.OltmannsT. F.GleasonM. E. J.TurkheimerE. (2006). Mixed impressions: Reactions of strangers to people with pathological personality traits. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 395-410. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.01.005
12.
GalloisC.CallanV. J. (1988). Communication accommodation and the prototypical speaker: Predicting evaluations of status and solidarity. Language and Communication, 8, 271-283. doi:10.1016/0271-5309(88)90022-5
13.
GalloisC.GilesH. (2015). Communication accommodation theory. In TracyK. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp. 159-176). New York, NY: Blackwell/Wiley.
14.
GilesH. (Ed.). (2016). Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GilesH.CouplandN. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
16.
GoldingerS. D. (1998). Echoes of echoes? An episodic theory of lexical access. Psychological Review, 105, 251. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.251
17.
GolinkoffR. M.AliotoA. (1995). Infant-directed speech facilitates lexical learning in adults hearing Chinese: Implications for language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 22, 703-726. doi:10.1017/S0305000900010011
18.
GregoryS. W.Jr.GallagherT. J. (2002). Spectral analysis of candidates’ nonverbal vocal communication: Predicting US presidential election outcomes. Social Psychology Quarterly, 298-308. doi:10.2307/3090125
19.
GregoryS. W.Jr.WebsterS.HuangG. (1993). Voice pitch and amplitude convergence as a metric of quality in dyadic interviews. Language and Communication, 13, 195-217. doi:10.1016/0271-5309(93)90026-J
20.
KlofstadC. A.AndersonR. C.PetersS. (2012). Sounds like a winner: Voice pitch influences perception of leadership capacity in both men and women. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 279, 2698-2704. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.0311
21.
KoE.-S.SeidlA.CristiaA.ReimchenM.SoderstromM. (2016). Entrainment of prosody in the interaction of mothers with their young children. Journal of Child Language, 43, 284-309.
NataleM. (1975). Convergence of mean vocal intensity in dyadic communication as a function of social desirability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 790. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.5.790
24.
PittsM. J.HarwoodJ. (2015). Communication accommodation competence: The nature and nurture of accommodative resources across the lifespan. Language and Communication, 41, 89-99.
25.
TigueC. C.BorakD. J.O’ConnorJ. J.SchandlC.FeinbergD. R. (2012). Voice pitch influences voting behavior. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 210-216. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.09.004
26.
UtherM.KnollM. A.BurnhamD. (2007). Do you speak E-NG-L-I-SH? A comparison of foreigner- and infant-directed speech. Speech Communication, 49, 2-7. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2006.10.003
27.
VargheseA. L.NilsenE. S. (2016). Guess who? Children use prosody to infer intended listeners. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 34, 306-312. doi:10.1111/bjdp.12135
