Whose voice is that? Challenges in forensic phonetics
In this paper, we explore speaker recognition as a process that is based partly
on analysis of phonetic and linguistic features and partly on pattern recognition
(Gestalt perception). Central to this paper is the challenge to incorporate the
dual nature of speaker recognition in forensic casework. To meet this challenge,
we propose the so-called “blind grouping” method. Blind grouping does not
require verbal-analytic terminology, but requires the expert to compare anonymised
fragments and arrange them into groups based on same-speaker and
different-speaker judgements. It allows the forensic expert to use any strategy to
reach a result, including pattern recognition and feature analysis. This method
is proposed as a supplement to the traditional auditory-acoustic method.
References (23)
References
Abercrombie, D. (1967). Elements of general phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Baldwin, J., & French, P. (1990). Forensic phonetics. London and New York: Pinter.
Bever, T.G. (1975). Cerebral asymmetries in humans are due to the differentiation of two incompatible processes: Holistic and analytic. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 263, 251–262.
Broeders, A.P.A. (2009). De blinde onderzoeker. Trema Tijdschrift voor de Rechterlijke Macht, 6, 237–243.
Cambier-Langeveld, T. (2007). Current methods in forensic speaker identification: Results of a collaborative exercise. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 14(2), 223–243.
Cambier-Langeveld, T., & van der Torre, E.J. (2004). Fighting the confirmation bias: blind grouping.
Proceedings of IAFPA 13th Annual Conference. Helsinki, Finland, 28–31 July, 2004.
French, P., & Stevens, L. (2013). Forensic speech science. In M.J. Jones & R.-A. Knight (Eds.), The Bloomsbury Companion to Phonetics (pp. 183–197), London: Continuum.
Gold, E., & French, P. (2011). International practices in forensic speaker comparison. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 18(2), 293–307.
Hollien, H. (1990). The acoustics of crime: The new science of forensic phonetics. New York and London: Plenum Press.
Köster, O., Jessen, M., Khairi, F., & Eckert, H. (2007). Auditory-perceptual identification of voice quality by expert and non-expert listeners. In
Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences
,
Saarbrücken, Germany
, 6–10 August, 2007 (pp. 1845–1848).
Kreiman, J., & Sidtis, D.(2011). Foundations of voice studies: An interdisciplinary approach to voice production and perception. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Laver, J. (1980). The phonetic description of voice quality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laver, J. (1994). Principles of phonetics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nolan, F. (2005). Forensic speaker identification and the phonetic description of voice quality. In W.J. Hardcastle & J. Mackenzie Beck (Eds.), A figure of speech: A festschrift for John Laver (pp. 385–411). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nolan, F. (2012). Degrees of freedom in speech production: An argument for native speakers in LADO. The International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, 19(2), 263–289.
Rietveld, A.C.M., & Van Heuven, V.J. (1997). Algemene fonetiek [General phonetics]. Bussum: Coutinho.
Robertson, B., & Vignaux, G.A. (1995). Interpreting evidence: Evaluating forensic science in the courtroom. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Schiller, N.O., & Köster, O. (1998). The ability of expert witnesses to identify voices: A comparison between trained and untrained listeners. Forensic Linguistics, 5(1), 1–9.
Schreuder, M. (2011). Expectancy bias and forensic speaker identification.
Presentation at IAFPA 20th Annual Conference
. Vienna, Austria, 24–28 July, 2011.
Van Lancker, D., & Canter, G.J. (1982). Impairment of voice and face recognition in patients with hemispheric damage. Brain and Cognition, 1, 185–195.
Van Lancker, D., & Kreiman, J. (1986). Preservation of familiar speaker recognition but not unfamiliar speaker discrimination in aphasic patients. Clinical Aphasiology, 16, 234–240.
Van Lancker, D., & Kreiman, J. (1987). Unfamiliar voice discrimination and familiar voice recognition are independent and unordered abilities. Neuropsychologia, 25, 829–834.
Vermeulen, J. (2010). Is an evidence line up a remedy for confirmation bias? Presentation at the workshop Forensic Phonetics – Problems, Limitations and Promises. Aarhus, Denmark, 17 September, 2010.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Van der Vloed, David & Tina Cambier-Langeveld
2023.
How we use automatic speaker comparison in forensic practice.
International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law 29:2
► pp. 201 ff.
Da Silva, Albuquerque
2019.
Explorando os dois lados do cérebro: a percepção holística da fala reversa (PHFR) sob a perspectiva forense.
Revista Brasileira de Criminalística 8:1
► pp. 62 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.