The persuasiveness of synthetic speech versus human speech

Human Factors

Volumn 41, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 588-595

  Stern, Steven E ^a   Mullennix, John W ^a,b   Dyson, Corrie Lynn ^a   Wilson, Stephen J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; COMPUTER LANGUAGE; SCORING SYSTEM; SEX DIFFERENCE; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; VOICE;

EID: 0033505120     PISSN: 00187208     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1518/001872099779656680     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Baker, S. M., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Majority and minority influence: Source position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 5-19.
2. Engstrom, E. (1994). Effects of nonfluencies on speaker's credibility in newscast settings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 739-743.
3. Erickson, B., Lind, E. A., Johnson, B. C., & O'Barr, W. M. (1978). Speech style and impression formation in a court setting: The effects of "powerful" and "powerless" speech. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 266-279.
4. Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.
5. Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Waters, K. (1996). A prisoner's dilemma experiment on cooperation with people and human-like computers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 47-65.
6. Leathers, D. G. (1997). Successful nonverbal communication: Principles and applications (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
7. Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1986). Preference judgments comparing different synthetic voices (Research on Speech Perception Progress Report No. 12). Bloomington: Indiana University.
8. Lucia, V. C. (1998). The effects of speech rate and speaker-listener congruence on persuasion. Unpublished master's thesis, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.
9. McGarry, J., & Hendrick, C. (1974). Communicator credibility and persuasion. Memory and Cognition, 2, 82-86.
10. McHugh, A. (1976). Listener preference and comprehension tests of stress algorithms for a text-to-phonetic speech synthesis program (Naval Research Laboratory Report No. 8015). Arlington, VA: Office of Naval Research.
11. Mirenda, P., Eicher, D., & Beukelman, D. R. (1989). Synthetic and natural speech preferences of male and female listeners in four age groups. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32, 175-183.
12. Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Green, N. (1997). Are machines gender neutral? Gender-stereotypic responses to computers with voices. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 864-876.
13. Nusbaum, H. C., Scwab, E. C., & Pisoni, D. B. (1984). Subjective evaluation of synthetic speech: Measuring preference, naturalness, and acceptability (Research on Speech Perception, Progress Report No. 10). Bloomington: Indiana University.
14. Nye, P. W., Ingemann, F., & Donald, L. (1975). Synthetic speech comprehension: A comparison of listener performances with and preferences among different speech forms (Status Report on Speech Perception SR-41). New Haven, CT: Haskins Laboratories.
15. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
16. Priester, J. R., & Petty, R. E. (1995). Source attributions and persuasion: Perceived honesty as a determinant of message scrutiny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 637-654.
17. Ralston, J. V., Pisoni, D. B., & Mullennix, J. W. (1995). Perception and comprehension of speech. In A. K. Syrdal, R. Bennet, & S. Greenspan (Eds.), Applied speech technology (pp. 233-288). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
18. Rosselli, F., Skelly, J. J., & Mackie, D. M. (1995). Processing rational and emotional messages: The cognitive and affective mediation of persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31. 163-190.
19. Sadd, S. M., Welkowitz, J., & Feldstein, S. (1978). Judgments of characteristics of speakers in a natural stress situation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 57-64.
20. Smith, S. M., & Shaffer, D. R. (1995). Speed of speech and persuasion: Evidence for multiple effects. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1051-1060.
21. Stern, S. E., Brandt, S., & Hantula, D. A. (1998, April). The effects of disability and assistive technology on performance evaluation. Paper presented at the 13th Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX.
22. Syrdal, A. K. (1995). Text-to-speech systems. In A. K. Syrdal, R. Bennet, & S. Greenspan (Eds.), Applied speech technology (pp. 99-126). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
23. Woodall, W. G., & Burgoon, J. K. (1984). Talking fast and changing attitudes: A critique and clarification. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8, 127-142.