Improving the consistency of formant measurement

International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 35-51

  Duckworth, Martin ^a   McDougall, Kirsty ^b   de Jong, Gea ^c   Shockey, Linda ^d  

^a Martin Duckworth: Duckworth Consultancy Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c Gea de Jong: Forensic Research Associates   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Forensic phonetic evidence; Forensic phonetic reportwriting; Formant frequencies; Formant measurement; Inter analyst reliability

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053154518     PISSN: 17488885     EISSN: 17488893     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1558/ijsll.v18i1.35     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Boersma, P. and Weenink, D. (2007) Praat: doing phonetics by computer version 4.5.24 [computer program]. Available at http://www.praat.org/
2. Cooper, F. S., Delattre, P., Liberman, A. M., Borst, J. and Gerstman, L. (1952) Some experiments in the perception of synthetic speech sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 24: 597-606.
3. de Jong, G., McDougall, K., Hudson, T. and Nolan, F. (2007) The speaker-discriminating power of sounds undergoing historical change: a formant-based study. In J. Trouvain and W. J. Barry (eds) Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 1813-1816. 6-10 August 2007. Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes. http://www.icphs2007.de/conference/Papers/1542/1542.pdf
4. Fant, G. (1960) Acoustic Theory of Speech Production, with Calculations Based on X-ray Studies of Russian Articulations. The Hague: Mouton.
5. Foulkes, P. and Docherty, G. J. (2000) Another chapter in the story of /r/: 'Labiodental' variants in British English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(1): 30-59.
6. French, J. P. and Harrison, P. (2006) Investigative and evidential applications of forensic speech science. In A. Heaton-Armstrong, E. Shepherd, G. Gudjonsson and D. Wolchover (eds) Witness Testimony: psychological, investigative and evidential perspectives 247-262. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. French, J. P. and Harrison, P. T. (2004) Adapting the Praat speech analysis program to the purposes of forensic casework and research. Presentation given at the British Association of Academic Phoneticians Colloquium, Cambridge.
8. Harrison, P. (2004) Variability of Formant Measurements. MA Dissertation, University of York.
9. Koenig, W., Dunn, H. K. and Lacey, L. Y. (1946) The sound spectrograph. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 18(1): 19-49.
10. Ladefoged, P. (2006) A Course in Phonetics. (Fifth edition.) Boston: Thomson Wadsworth.
11. Laver, J. (1994) Principles of Phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Markel, J. D. and Gray Jr., A. H. (1976) Linear Prediction of Speech. Berlin: Springer.
13. Monsen, R. B. and Engebretson, A. M. (1983) The accuracy of formant frequency measurements: a comparison of spectrographic analysis and linear prediction. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 26(1): 89-97.
14. Nolan, F. (1983) The Phonetic Bases of Speaker Recognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Nolan, F. (1991) Forensic phonetics. Journal of Linguistics 27: 483-493.
16. Nolan, F. (1994) Auditory and acoustic analysis in speaker recognition. In J. Gibbons (ed.) Language and the Law 326-345. London: Longman.
17. 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.
18. Nolan, F. (2002) The 'telephone effect' on formants: a response. Forensic Linguistics 9(1): 74-82.
19. Nolan, F. and Grigoras, C. (2005) A case for formant analysis in forensic speaker identification. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 2(2): 143-173.
20. Nolan, F., McDougall, K., de Jong, G. and Hudson, T. (2009) The DyViS database: stylecontrolled recordings of 100 homogeneous speakers for forensic phonetic research. International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 16(1): 31-57.
21. Paliwal, K. K. (1984) Effectiveness of different vowel sounds in automatic speaker identification. Journal of Phonetics 12: 17-21.
22. Peterson, G. E. and Barney, H. L. (1952) Control methods used in a study of the vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 24(2): 175-184.
23. Rose, P. (2002) Forensic Speaker Identification. London: Taylor and Francis.
24. Stevens, K. N. (1971) Sources of inter- and intra-speaker variability in the acoustic properties of speech sounds. In A. Rigault and R. Charbonneau (eds) Proceedings of the 7th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences 206-232. 22-28 August 1971. Montreal: Mouton.
25. Stevens, K. N., Williams, C. E., 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.
26. Vallabha, G. K. and Tuller, B. (2002) Systematic errors in the formant analysis of steadystate vowels. Speech Communication 38: 141-160.