Using the Internet for speech research: An evaluative study examining affect in speech

Behaviour and Information Technology

Volumn 30, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 845-851

  Knoll, Monja A ^a,b   Uther, Maria ^c   Costall, Alan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

^c BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Emotional affect; Internet; Low pass filtering; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

AFFECTIVE SPEECH; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; AUDITORY THRESHOLDS; DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTIONS; EMOTIONAL AFFECT; ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL; INTERNET-BASED RESEARCH; LOW-PASS FILTERING; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RESEARCH;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; RESEARCH;

INTERNET;

EID: 84855684776     PISSN: 0144929X     EISSN: 13623001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2011.577192     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Boersma, P. and Weenink, D., 2005. Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 4.3.14). [Computer programme]. Available from: www.praat.org/[Accessed 1 June 2005].
2. Buchanan, T., 2007. Personality testing on the Internet: what we know, and what we do not. In: A.N. Joinson, K.Y.A McKenna, T. Postmes, and U-D. Reips, eds. The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology. Oxford: University Press, pp. 447-460.
3. Buchanan, T. and Smith, J.L., 1999a. Using the Internet for psychological research: personality testing on the World Wide Web. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 125-144.
4. Buchanan, T. and Smith, J.L., 1999b. Research on the Internet: validation of a world-wide Web mediated personality scale. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31 (4), 565-571.
5. Burnham, D., Kitamura, C., and Vollmer-Conna, U., 2002. What's new pussycat? On talking to babies and animals. Science, 296, 1095.
6. Cook, C., Heath, F., and Thompson, R.L., 2000. A meta-analysis of response rates in Web- or Internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60 (6), 821-836.
7. Corley, M. and Scheepers, C., 2002. Syntactic priming in English sentence production: categorical and latency evidence from an internet-based study. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9 (1), 126-131.
8. Cox, T.J., 2008. Scraping sounds and disgusting noises. Applied Acoustics, 69, 1195-1204.
9. Davis, R.N., 1999. Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: comparison with traditional methods. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31 (4), 572-577.
10. Epstein, J., et al., 2001. Ensuring sample equivalence across internet and paper- and pencil assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 17 (3), 339-346. (Pubitemid 32573588)
11. Gaver, W.W., 1993. What in the world do we hear? An ecological approach to auditory event perception. Ecological Psychology, 5 (1), 1-29.
12. Hecht, H., et al., 1999. A perception experiment with time-critical graphics animation on the world-wide Web. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31 (3), 439-445.
13. Hewson, C., et al., 2003. Internet research methods: a practical guide for the social and behavioural sciences. London: Sage Publications.
14. Honing, H., 2006. Evidence for tempo-specific timing in music using a web-based experimental setup. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32 (3), 780-786. (Pubitemid 44195480)
15. Honing, H., 2007. Is expressive timing relational invariant under tempo transformation? Psychology of Music, 35 (2), 276-285.
16. Honing, H. and Ladinig, O., 2008. The potential of the Internet for music perception research: a comment on lab-based versus web-based studies. Empirical Musicol-ogy Review, 3 (1), 4-7.
17. Honing, H. and Reips, U-D., 2008. Web-based versus lab-based studies: a response to Kendall. Empirical Musicol-ogy Review, 3 (2), 73-77.
18. Huang, R.L., et al., 2009. Features and predictors of problematic internet use in Chinese college students. Behaviour & Information Technology, 28 (5), 485-490.
19. Joinson, A., 1999. Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31 (3), 433-438.
20. Joinson, A.N., et al., 2007. Introduction to the handbook. In: A.N. Joinson, K.Y.A McKenna, T. Postmes, and U-D. Reips, eds. The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology. Oxford: University Press, 1.3.
21. Kallinen, K. and Ravaja, N., 2007. Comparing speakers versus headphones in listening to news from a computer - individual differences and psychophysiological responses. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 303-317. (Pubitemid 44278495)
22. Keller, F. and Alexopoulou, T., 2001. Phonology competes with syntax: experimental evidence for the interaction of word order and accent placement in the realization of information structure. Cognition, 79 (3), 301-372. (Pubitemid 32101498)
23. Kendall, R.A., 2008. Commentary on 'The potential of the Internet for music perception research: a comment on lab-based versus web-based studies' by Honing & Ladinig. Empirical Musicology Review, 3 (2), 8-10.
24. Kitamura, C. and Burnham, D., 2003. Pitch and communicative intent in mother's speech: adjustments for age and sex in the first year. Infancy, 4 (1), 85-110. (Pubitemid 44783420)
25. Knoll, M.A., Uther, M., and Costall, A., 2009. Effects of low-pass filtering on the judgment of emotional affect using speech directed to infants, adults and foreigners. Speech Communication, 51, 210-216.
26. Krantz, J.H., 2000. Tell me, what did you see? The stimulus on computers. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 32 (2), 221-229.
27. Krantz, J.H., 2001. Stimulus delivery on the Web: what can be presented when calibration isn't possible. In: U-D. Reips and M. Bosnjak, eds. Dimensions of Internet science. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science, 113-130.
28. Krantz, J.H., Ballard, J., and Scher, J., 1997. Comparing the results of laboratory and World-Wide Web samples on the determinants of female attractiveness. Behaviour, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 29 (2), 264-269. (Pubitemid 127710767)
29. McGraw, K.O., Tew, M.D., and Williams, J.E., 2000. The integrity of Web-delivered experiments: can you trust the data? Psychological Science, 11 (6), 502-506.
30. Rees, H. and Noyes, J.M., 2007. Mobile telephones, computers, and the Internet: sex differences in adolescents' use and attitudes. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10 (3), 482-484. (Pubitemid 47001193)
31. Reips, U.-D., 2000. The Web experiment method: advantages, disadvantages and solutions. In: M.H. Birnbaum, ed. Psychological experiments on the Internet. San Diego: Academic Press, 89-114.
32. Reips, U.-D., 2007. The methodology of Internet-based experiments. In: A.N. Joinson, K.Y.A McKenna, T. Postmes, and U-D. Reips, eds. The oxford handbook of Internet psychology. Oxford: University Press, 373-390.
33. Richter, S.H., et al., 2010. Systematic variation improves reproducibility of animal experiments. Nature Methods, 7 (3), 167-168.
34. Rosenthal, R., 1976. Experimenter effects in behavioral research. New York: Irvington Publishers.
35. Scherer, K.R., Koivumaki, J., and Rosenthal, R., 1972. Minimal cues in the vocal communication of affect: judging emotions from content-masked speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1 (3), 269-285.
36. Schmidt, W.C., 1997. World-Wide-Web survey research: benefits, potential problems and solutions. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 29, 274-279. (Pubitemid 127710769)
37. Senior, C., et al., 1999. An investigation into the perception of dominance from schematic faces: a study using the World-Wide Web. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 31 (2), 341-346.
38. Smith, M.A. and Leigh, B., 1997. Virtual subjects: using the Internet as an alternative source of subjects and research environment. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 29 (4), 496-505. (Pubitemid 127710801)
39. Stevens, S.B. and Morris, T.L., 2007. College dating and social anxiety: using the Internet as a means of connecting to others. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10 (5), 680-688. (Pubitemid 47573884)
40. Uther, M., Knoll, M.A., and Burnham, D., 2007. Do you speak E-n-g-l-i-s-h? A comparison of foreigner- and infant-directed speech. Speech Communication, 49 (1), 2-7. (Pubitemid 46028917)
41. Welch, N. and Krantz, J.H., 1996. The World-Wide Web as a medium for psychoacoustical demonstrations and experiments: experience and results. Behavior, Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28 (2), 192-196. (Pubitemid 126454812)