Acoustic and perceptual effects of telephone transmission on vowel quality

International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 161-192

  Lawrence, Sophie ^a   Nolan, Francis ^a   McDougall, Kirsty ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Acoustic analysis; Auditory analysis; Forensic speaker comparison; Formant frequencies; Telephone transmission; Vowel quality

Indexed keywords

EID: 62349102398     PISSN: 17488885     EISSN: 17488893     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1558/ijsll.vl5i2.161     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Baldwin, J.R. (1979) Phonetics and speaker identification. Medicine, Science and the Law 19(4): 231-232.
2. Baldwin, J. and French, P. (1990) Forensic Phonetics. London: Pinter.
3. Bricker, P. and Pruzansky, S. (1966) Effects of stimulus content and duration of talker identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 40(6): 1441-1449.
4. Byrne, C. and Foulkes, P. (2004) The 'mobile phone effect' on vowel formants. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 11(1): 83-102.
5. de Jong, G., McDougall, K. and Nolan, F. (2007) Sound change and speaker identity: an acoustic study. In C. Müller (ed.) Speaker Classification II: selected papers 130-141. Berlin: Springer.
6. Deterding, D. (1997) The formants of monophthong vowels in Standard Southern British English pronunciation. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 27: 47-55.
7. Fant, G. (1960) Acoustic Theory of Speech Production, with Calculations Based on X-ray Studies of Russian Articulations. The Hague: Mouton.
8. Foulkes, P. and Barron, A. (2000) Telephone speaker recognition amongst members of a close social network. Forensic Linguistics 7(2): 180-198.
9. French, P. (1994) An overview of forensic phonetics with particular reference to speaker identification. Forensic Linguistics 1(1): 169-181.
10. French, P. (1998) Mr. Akbar's nearest ear versus the Lombard reflex: a case study in forensic phonetics. Forensic Linguistics 5(1): 58-68.
11. Hawkins, S. and Midgley, J. (2005) Formant frequencies of RP monophthongs in four age-groups of speakers. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 35(2): 183-199.
12. Hirson, A., French, P. and Howard, D. (1995) Speech fundamental frequency over the telephone and face-to-face: some implications for forensic phonetics. In J. W. Lewis (ed.) Studies in General and English Phonetics: essays in honour of Professor J. D. O'Connor 230-240. London: Routledge.
13. Hollien, H. (1990) The Acoustics of Crime: the new science of forensic phonetics. New York: Plenum.
14. Hollien, H. (2002) Forensic Voice Identification. San Diego: Academic Press.
15. Kersta, L.G. (1962) Voiceprint identification. Nature 196(4861): 1253-1257.
16. Kerstholt, J.H., Jansen, N.J.M., van Amelsvoort, A.G. and Broeders, A.P.A. (2006) Earwitnesses: effects of accent, retention and telephone. Applied Cognitive Psychology 20(2): 187-197.
17. Kerswill, P. and Wright, S. (1990) The validity of phonetic transcription: limitations of a sociolinguistic research tool. Language Variation and Change 2: 255-275.
18. Künzel, H.J. (1995) Field procedures in forensic speaker recognition. In J.W. Lewis (ed.) Studies in General and English Phonetics: essays in honour of Professor J.D. O'Connor 68-84. London: Routledge.
19. Künzel, H.J. (2001) Beware of the 'telephone effect': the influence of telephone transmission on the measurement of formant frequencies. Forensic Linguistics 8(1): 80-99.
20. Künzel, H.J. (2002) Rejoinder to Francis Nolan's 'The 'telephone effect' on formants: a response'. Forensic Linguistics 9(1): 83-86.
21. Ladefoged, P. (1967) Three Areas of Experimental Phonetics. London: Oxlord University Press.
22. Laver, J. (1980) The Phonetic Description of Voice Quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. McDougall, K. (2006) Dynamic features of speech and the characterisation of speakers: towards a new approach using formant frequencies. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 13(1): 89-126.
24. Nolan, F. (1983) The Phonetic Bases of Speaker Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Nolan, F. (1990) The limitations of auditory phonetic speaker recognition. In H. Kniffka (ed.) Texte zu Theorie und Praxis forensischer Linguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
26. Nolan, F. (1991) Forensic phonetics. Journal of Linguistics 27: 483-493.
27. Nolan, F. (1994) Auditory and acoustic analysis in speaker recognition. In J. Gibbons (ed.) Language and the Law 326-345. London: Longman.
28. Nolan, F. (1997) Speaker recognition and forensic phonetics. In W.J. Hardcastle and J. Laver (eds) The Handbook of Phonetic Sciences 744-767. Oxford: Blackwell.
29. Nolan, F. (2001) Speaker identification evidence: its forms, limitations and roles. In T. Salmi-Tolonen, R. Foley and I. Tukiainen (eds) Proceedings of the Conference 'Law and Language: Prospect and Retrospect'. 12-15 December 2001. Department of Linguistics, University of Lapland, Levi, Finnish Lapland: Rovaniemi. http://www.ling.cam.ac.uk/francis/LawLang.doc
30. Nolan, F. (2002) The 'telephone effect' on formants: a response. Forensic Linguistics 9(1): 74-82.
31. Nolan, F. (2005) Forensic speaker identification and the phonetic description of voice quality. In W.J. Hardcastle and J.M. Beck (eds) A Figure of Speech: a festschrift for John Lover 385-411. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32. Nolan, F., McDougall, K., de Jong, G. and Hudson, T. (2006) A forensic phonetic study of 'dynamic' sources of variability in speech: the DyViS project. In P. Warren and C.I. Watson (eds) Proceedings of the 11th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology 13-18. 6-8 December 2006. Auckland: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association. http://www.assta.org/sst/2006/sst2006-17.pdf
33. Rathborn, H. A., Bull, R. H. and Clifford, B. R. (1981) Voice recognition over the telephone. Journal of Police Science and Administration 9: 280-284.
34. Rose, P. (2003) The technical comparison of forensic voice samples. In I. Freckleton and H. Selby (eds) Expert Evidence. Sydney: Lawbook Co., Chapter 99.
35. Schiller, N.O. and Koster, O. (1998) The ability of expert witnesses to identify voices: a comparison between trained and untrained listeners. Forensic Linguistics 5(1): 1-9.
36. Shirt, M. (1984) An auditory speaker recognition experiment. In R. Lawrence (ed.) Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics 6(1): 101-104.
37. Stevens, K.N. (1989) On the quantal nature of speech. Journal of Phonetics 17: 3-45.
38. Stevens, K.N. (1998) Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
39. Stevens, K.N., Williams, C.K., Carbonell, J.R. and Wood, B. (1968) Speaker authentication and identification: a comparison of spectrographic and auditory presentations of speech material. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 44(6): 1596-1607.
40. Summers, W., Johnson, K., Pisoni, D.B. and Bernaki, R. (1989) An addendum to 'Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses'. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 86(5): 1596-1607.
41. Summers, W., Pisoni, D., Bernaki, R., Pedlow, R. and Stokes, M. (1988) Effects of noise on speech production: acoustic and perceptual analyses. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84(3): 917-928.
42. Yarmey, A.D. (2003) Earwitness identification over the telephone and in field settings. Forensic Linguistics 10(1): 62-74.
43. Young, M. and Campbell, R. (1967) Effects of context on talker identification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 42(6): 1250-1254.