Do sound segments contribute to sounding charismatic? Evidence from a case study of Steve jobs’ and Mark Zuckerberg’s vowel spaces

International Journal of Acoustics and Vibrations

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2019, Pages 343-355

  Niebuhr, Oliver ^a   Gonzalez, Simon ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTICS; MECHANICAL ENGINEERING;

BACK UP; CONTEXT FACTORS; KEY CHARACTERISTICS; STEVE JOBS; VOWEL SPACE;

LINGUISTICS;

EID: 85068878141     PISSN: 10275851     EISSN: 24151408     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.20855/ijav.2019.24.21531     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Antonakis, J., Bastardoz N., and Jacquart P. Charisma: An ill-defined and ill-measured gift, Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behaviour, 3, 293–319, (2016). https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062305
2. Awamleh R., and Gardner, W. L. Perceptions of leader charisma and effectiveness: The effects of vision content, delivery, and organizational performance, The Leadership Quarterly, 10 (3), 345–373, (1999). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1048-9843(99)00022-3
3. Berger, S., Niebuhr, O., and Peters, B. Winning over an audience — a perception-based analysis of prosodic features of charismatic speech, Proc. 43rd Annual Conference of the German Acoustical Society (DAGA), Kiel, Germany, (2017).
4. Boersma, P. Praat, a system for doing phonetics by computer, Glot International, 5, 341–345, (2001). https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/aud.0b013e31821473f7
5. Biadsy, F., Rosenberg A., Carlson R., Hirschberg J., and Strangert E. A cross-cultural comparison of American, Palestinian, and Swedish perception of charismatic speech, Proc. 4th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Campinas, Brazil, (2008).
6. Bosker, H. R. The role of temporal amplitude modulations in the political arena: Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump, Proc. 18th International Interspeech Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, (2017). https://dx.doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2017-142
7. Camper Bull, R. Moving from project management to project leadership: a practical guide to leading groups, CRC, Boca Raton, (2010). https://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781439826683
8. Chen, A., Gussenhoven, C., and Rietveld, A. Language-specific uses of the Effort Code, Proc. 1st International Conference of Speech Prosody, Aix-en-Provence, France, (2002).
9. Cho T., Kim D., and de Jong K. Prosodically-conditioned fine-tuning of coarticulatory vowel nasalization in English, Journal of Phonetics, 64, 71–89, (2017). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.12.003
10. Clopper C. G., Pisoni D. B., and de Jong, K. Acoustic characteristics of the vowel systems of six regional varieties of American English, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 118 (3), 1661–1676, (2005). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2000774
11. Clopper, C. G., and Turnbull, R. Exploring variation in phonetic reduction: Linguistic, social, and cognitive factors, in F. Cangemi, M. Clayards, O. Niebuhr, B. Schuppler, and M. Zellers (eds), Rethinking Reduction: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Conditions, Mechanisms, and Domains for Phonetic Variation, F. Cangemi, M. Clayards, O. Niebuhr, B. Schuppler, and M. Zellers (eds), de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, 25–72, (2018). https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110524178-002
12. Eriksson, A., and Traunmuller, H. Perception of Vocal EfFort and Distance From The Speaker On The Basis of Vowel Utterances, Perception & Psychophysics, 64 (1), 131–139, (2002). https://dx.doi.org/10.3758/bf03194562
13. Ernestus, M., and Smith, R. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of phonetic variation in Dutch”eigenlijk”, in F. Cangemi, M. Clayards, O. Niebuhr, B. Schuppler, and M. Zellers (eds), Rethinking Reduction: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Conditions, Mechanisms, and Domains for Phonetic Variation, F. Cangemi, M. Clayards, O. Niebuhr, B. Schuppler, and M. Zellers (eds), de Gruyter, Berlin/Boston, 129–163, (2018). https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110524178-005
14. Feng, G., and Castelli, E. Some acoustic features of nasal and nasalized vowels. A target for vowel nasalization, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99 (6), 3694–3706, (1996). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.414967
15. Flege, J. E. Anticipatory and carry-over nasal coarticulation in the speech of children and adults, Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 2 (4), 525–536, (1988). https://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3104.525
16. Flynn, N., and Foulkes, P. Comparing vowel formant normalization methods, Proc. 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China, (2011).
17. Fox Cabane, O. The charisma myth: How anyone can master the art and science of personal magnetism, Penguin, New York, (2012).
18. Ghorshi, S. A., Vaseghi, S., and Yan, Q. Comparative analysis of formants of British, American and Australian accents, Proc. 7th International Interspeech Conference, Pittsburgh, USA, (2006).
19. Grieve J., Speelman D., and Geeraerts D. A multivariate spatial analysis of vowel formants in American English, Journal of Linguistic Geography, 1 (1), 31–51, (2013). https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jlg.2013.3
20. Gruener W. On stage, Mark Zuckerberg is no Steve Jobs, Tom’s Guide (2011). Retrieved from http://www.tomsguide.com/us/facebook-skype-videocalling-social-networking,news-11808.html, (Accessed December 28, 2018).
21. Gussenhoven, C. Intonation and interpretation: phonetics and phonology, Proc. 1st International Conference of Speech Prosody, Aix-en-Provence, France, (2002).
22. Gussenhoven C. The phonology of tone and intonation, CUP, Cambridge: (2004). https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511616983
23. Heselwood, B., and Plug, L. The Role of F2 and F3 in the perception of rhoticity: evidence from listening experiments, Proc. 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Hong Kong, China, (2011).
24. Hillenbrand, J., and Gayvert, R. NAIC Technical Series Report, Speaker-Independent Vowel Classification Based on Fundamental and Formant Frequencies, (1987). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2024478
25. Hiroyuki, T., and Rathcke, T. Then, what is charisma? The role of audio-visual prosody in L1 and L2 political speeches, Proc. Phonetik & Phonologie im deutschsprachi-gen Raum, Munich, Germany, (2016).
26. Holtgraves, T. M. Language as social action: social psychology and language use, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, (2001). https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781410601773
27. Jiang, J., Chen, M., and Alwan, A. On the perception of voicing in syllable-initial plosives in noise, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 119 (2), 1092–1105, (2006). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2149841
28. Johnson, K. Acoustic and Auditory Phonetics, Blackwell, Oxford, (2012). https://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000078663
29. Kendall, T., and Thomas, E. R. Vowels: Vowel manipulation, normalization, and plotting in R, (2009). Retrieved from http://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/vowels/index.html, (Accessed August 14, 2018).
30. Kohler, K. J. Segmental reduction in connected speech in German: phonological facts and phonetic explanations, in Speech Production and Speech Modelling, W.J. Hardcastle, and A. Marchal (eds), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, (1990), 69–92. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2037-8 4
31. Ladd D. R., Faulkner D., Faulkner H., and Schepman A. Constant ‘segmental anchoring‘of F0 movements under changes in speech rate, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106 (3), 1543–1554, (1999). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.427151
32. Ladefoged, P. American English, The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 41–44, (1999). https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0952675700003894
33. Larson, P. L., and Hamlet, S. L. Coarticulation effects on the nasalization of vowels using nasal/voice amplitude ratio instrumentation, The Cleft Palate Journal, 24 (4), 286–290, (1987).
34. Liénard, J. S. and Di Benedetto, M. G. Effect of vocal effort on spectral properties of vowels, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106 (1), 411–422, (1999). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.428140
35. Lindblom B. Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H & H theory, in Speech Production and Perception, W. J. Hardcastle, A. Marchal (eds), Kluwer, Dordrecht, 403–439, (1990). https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2037-8 16
36. Lisker, L., and Abramson, A. S. A cross-language study of voicing in initial stops: acoustical measurements, Word, 20 (3), 384–422, (1964). https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1964.11659830
37. Liu C. and Kewley-Port, D. Vowel formant discrimination for high-fidelity speech, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116 (2), 1224–1233, (2004). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1768958
38. Louekari L. Charismatic communication style in knowledge-intensive organizations, MA thesis, School of Business, Aalto University, Finland, (2015).
39. Miet, G., Gerrits, A., and Valière, J. C. Low-band extension of telephone band speech, Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Edinburgh, Scotland, (2000). https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/icassp.2000.862116
40. Mortensen, K. W. The laws of charisma: how to captivate, inspire, and influence for maximum success: how to captivate, inspire, and influence for maximum success, Amacom, New York, (2011).
41. Niebuhr, O. Rich reduction: sound-segment residuals and the encoding of communicative functions along the hypo-hyper scale, Proc. 7th Tutorial & Research Workshop on Experimental Linguistics, St. Petersburg, Russia, (2016).
42. Niebuhr, O., Voße, J., and Brem, A. What makes a charismatic speaker? A computer-based acoustic-prosodic analysis of Steve Jobs tone of voice, Computers in Human Behaviour, 64, 366–382, (2016). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.059
43. Niebuhr, O., Brem, A., and Novák-Tót, E. Prosodic constructions of charisma in business speeches — A contrastive acoustic analysis of Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg, Proc. 8th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Boston, USA, (2016).
44. Niebuhr, O. Clear speech — mere speech? How segmental and prosodic speech reduction shape the impression that speakers create on listeners, Proc. 18th Interspeech Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, (2017). https://dx.doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2017-28
45. Niebuhr O., Thumm J., and Michalsky J. Shapes and timing in charismatic speech - Evidence from sounds and melodies, Proc. 9th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Poznan, Poland, (2018). https://dx.doi.org/10.21437/speechprosody.2018-118
46. Novák-Tót, E., Niebuhr, O., and Chen, A. A gender bias in the acoustic-melodic features of charismatic speech? Proc. 18th Interspeech Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, (2017). https://dx.doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2017-1349
47. Olsen, R. M., Olsen, M. L., Stanley, J. A., Renwick, M., and Kretzschmar, W. A. Methods for transcription and forced alignment of a legacy speech corpus, Proc. ASA Meetings on Acoustics, 30 (1), 1–13, (2017). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/2.0000559
48. Peterson, G, and Barney, H. Control methods used in a study of the vowels, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 24 (2), 175–184, (1952). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.1906875
49. Pickett, J. M. The Sounds of speech communication: A primer of acoustic phonetics and speech perception, University Park Press, Baltimore, (1980).
50. Ramus, F., Nespor, M., and Mehler, J. Correlates of Linguistic Rhythm in the Speech Signal, Cognition, 73, 265–292, (1999). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00058-x
51. Reddy, S., and Stanford, J. Toward completely automated vowel extraction: introducing DARLA, Linguistics Vanguard, 1 (1), 15–28, (2015). https://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2015-0002
52. Reetz, H., and Jongman, A. Phonetics: transcription, production, acoustics, and perception, Blackwell, Oxford, (2009).
53. Rosenberg A., and Hirschberg, J. Charisma perception from text and speech, Speech Communication, 51 (7), 640–655, (2009). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2008.11.001
54. Rusli, E. M. Facebook to hold developer conference on April 30, The Wall Street Journal, (2014). Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/03/08/facebook-to-holdf8-developer-conference-on-april-30/, (Accessed February 4, 2016).
55. Samlowski, B., Kern, F., and Trouvain, J. Perception of Suspense in Live Football Commentaries from German and British Perspectives, Proc. 9th International Conference of Speech Prosody, Poznan, Poland, (2018). https://dx.doi.org/10.21437/speechprosody.2018-8
56. Schötz S. Perception, analysis, and synthesis of speaker age, PhD thesis, Lund University, Sweden, (2006).
57. Schlender, B. and Tetzeli, R. Becoming Steve Jobs, New York, Crown, (2015).
58. Smiljanić R., and Bradlow, A. R. Production and perception of clear speech in Croatian and English, Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 118 (3), 1677–1688, (2005). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2000788
59. Sørensen, L. S. How to grow an Apple: did Steve Jobs speak Apple to success?, MA thesis, Aarlborg University, Denmark, (2013).
60. Stevens, K. N. Acoustic phonetics, MIT Press, Cambridge, (1998).
61. Strangert, E. and Gustafson, J. What makes a good speaker? subject ratings, acoustic measurements and perceptual evaluations, Proc. 9th International Interspeech Conference, Brisbane, Australia, (2008).
62. Sundermeier, J. How does hubris influence the innovation activities of company founders? Proc. Babson Conference Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Bodø, Norway, (2016).
63. Sutter, J. D. When it comes to presentation, Mark Zuckerberg is no Steve Jobs, (2011). Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com, (Accessed December 28, 2018).
64. Tobak, S. Charisma: an obsolete leadership quality, CBS News, (2012). Retrieved from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/charisma-an-obsoleteleadership-quality/, (Accessed December 28, 2018)
65. Touati, P. Prosodic aspects of political rhetoric, Proc. ESCA Workshop on Prosody, Lund, Sweden, (1993).
66. Traunmüller, H. and Eriksson, A. Acoustic effects of variation in vocal effort by men, women, and children, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107 (6), 3438–3451, (2000). https://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.429414
67. van Bergem D. R. Acoustic vowel reduction as a function of sentence accent, word stress, and word class, Speech Communication, 12 (1), 1–23, (1993). https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-6393(93)90015-d
68. Weirich, M., Fuchs, S., Simpson, A., Winkler, R., and Perrier, P. Mumbling: macho or morphology?, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 59, S1587–S1595, (2016). https://dx.doi.org/10.1044/2016 jslhr-s-15-0040
69. Weninger, F., Krajewski, J., Batliner, A., and Schuller, B. The voice of leadership: Models and performances of automatic analysis in online speeches, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 3 (4), 496–508, (2012). https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/t-affc.2012.15
70. Wright, R. Factors of lexical competition in vowel articulation, in Papers in Laboratory Phonology VI, Local J., Ogden R., Temple R. (eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 75–86, (2004). https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511486425.005
71. Xu, M., Homae, F., Hashimoto, R., and Hagiwara, H. Acoustic cues for the recognition of self-voice and other-voice, Frontiers in Psychology, 4 (735), 1–7, (2013). https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00735