Familiar Voices Are More Intelligible, Even if They Are Not Recognized as Familiar

We can recognize familiar people by their voices, and familiar talkers are more intelligible than unfamiliar talkers when competing talkers are present. However, whether the acoustic voice characteristics that permit recognition and those that benefit intelligibility are the same or different is unknown. Here, we recruited pairs of participants who had known each other for 6 months or longer and manipulated the acoustic correlates of two voice characteristics (vocal tract length and glottal pulse rate). These had different effects on explicit recognition of and the speech-intelligibility benefit realized from familiar voices. Furthermore, even when explicit recognition of familiar voices was eliminated, they were still more intelligible than unfamiliar voices—demonstrating that familiar voices do not need to be explicitly recognized to benefit intelligibility. Processing familiar-voice information appears therefore to depend on multiple, at least partially independent, systems that are recruited depending on the perceptual goal of the listener.

Download Full-text

Intelligibility benefit for familiar voices does not depend on better discrimination of fundamental frequency or vocal tract length

10.31234/osf.io/y6gnh ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Emma Holmes ◽

Ingrid Johnsrude

Keyword(s):

Fundamental Frequency ◽

Pulse Rate ◽

Vocal Tract ◽

Tract Length ◽

Familiar Voice ◽

The Difference ◽

Voice Discrimination

Speech is more intelligible when it is spoken by familiar than unfamiliar people. Two cues to voice identity are glottal pulse rate (GPR) and vocal tract length (VTL): perhaps these features are more accurately represented for familiar voices in a listener’s brain. If so, listeners should be able to discriminate smaller manipulations to perceptual correlates of these vocal parameters for familiar than unfamiliar voices. We recruited pairs of friends who had known each other for 0.5–22.5 years. We measured thresholds for discriminating pitch (correlate of GPR) and formant spacing (correlate of VTL; ‘VTL-timbre’) for voices that were familiar (friends) and unfamiliar (friends of other participants). When a competing talker was present, speech was substantially more intelligible when it was spoken in a familiar voice. Discrimination thresholds were not systematically smaller for familiar compared to unfamiliar talkers. Although, participants detected smaller deviations to VTL-timbre than pitch uniquely for familiar talkers, suggesting a different balance of characteristics contribute to discrimination of familiar and unfamiliar voices. Across participants, we found no relationship between the size of the intelligibility benefit for a familiar over an unfamiliar voice and the difference in discrimination thresholds for the same voices. Also, the intelligibility benefit was not affected by the acoustic manipulations we imposed on voices to assess discrimination thresholds. Overall, these results provide no evidence that two important cues to voice identity—pitch and VTL-timbre—are more accurately represented when voices are familiar, or are necessarily responsible for the large intelligibility benefit derived from familiar voices.

Download Full-text