Dey,
A.,
Feinberg,
D.,
&
Kim,
J.
Effect
of
Voice
Pitch
on
Content
Comprehension
Department
of
Psychology,
Neuroscience,
and
Behaviour
h"p://www.intropsych.net
Copyright
©
2006‐2009.
All
rights
reserved.
Today’s
Outline
  What?
  Background
  Research
QuesDon
  How?
  Results
  Why?
  ImplicaDons
  Conclusion   LimitaDons
and
Future
InvesDgaDons
  QuesDons?
IntroducNon
–
A
Rising
Trend
 Is
it
Ideal?
 
Audio
NarraDon
 
Effect
of
Vocal
CharacterisDcs
 
Pitch
Voices
Pitch
=
120
Hz
210
Hz
=
 GeneNc
DisposiNon
=
Natural
Pitch
 Vocal
Bands
=
ElasDc
 Training
=
Wider
Range
Voices
Pitch
 What’s
it
good
for?
 InflecDon
 AlternaDve
Meaning
 EmoDons
 Hold
A"enDon
(Rogerson
&
Dodd,
2005)
Voices
Pitch
and
Social
PercepNon
  Voice
Pitch
+
Social
Percep0on
  Low
Pitch
AXribuNons:
  A"racDveness
  Dominance
  Masculinity
Voices
and
MarkeNng
  Pitch  Responsiveness to Persuasive messages
  Male + Low Pitch
  More Pleasant + Persuasive
  Male + High Pitch
  Less Confident + Truthful + Persuasive
  More nervous and weaker
  2003 Experiment:
  Radio  Advertisement  Participant Rating
  Low Pitch = More credible
Dahl, Ritchie & Shahin, 2003
Voices
Pitch
in
the
Classroom
  Voice
+
InformaNon
Processing?
  Impressions
(Authority

A"enDon

Learning)
  Experiment
:
(Apple
et
al.,
1979)
  Voice
Pitch
(20%)

Speaker
PercepDon
  Results:
  High
=
Less
Truthful,
Less
EmphaDc,
More
nervous
  Why?:
=
More
effort
Our
Hypothesis
  The
effect
of
voice
pitch
manipulaNons,
during
computer
based
instrucNon,
on
Student
Comprehension
  QuanDtaDve
  PredicNons:
  40
Hz
difference
detectable
  Low
Pitch
=
  PosiDve
A"ribuDons
+
Higher
Performance
  Novel
Study
Methodology
 SNmuli:
 Male
Voice
Manipulated
 Video
PowerPoint
Lecture
 ParNcipants
 60
Undergrads
high
low
Methodology
PART 1: Watch 10 min Web Lecture
PART 2: Complete Confidence / Perception Questionnaire + M.C
Comprehension Quiz.
PART 3: Students conduct a force-choice attribution task
Sample
QuesNon:
In a transporter malfunction, John’s stomach
was accidently removed. What effect will it have
on his eating habits?
A) John will eat more.
B) John will eat slightly less.
C) John will now experience highly variable levels of
hunger.
D) No effect.
Results:
AXribuNons
Results:
Performance
Effect
of
Voice
Pitch
on
Comprehension
100
95
90
Percent
Correct
(%)
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
51.4
53.9
High
Pitch
Low
Pitch
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Voice
Pitch
ImplicaNons
–
What
does
this
Mean
 
Academic
 
Good
News
for
Instructors
 QuesDons
Validity
of
Course
EvaluaDons
LimitaNons
and
Future
InvesNgaNons
 LimitaNons
 Only
Male
Voices
 
40
Hz
enough?
 
Future
InvesNgaNons
 Pitch
+
Other
=
Effect
?
 
Pitch
and
Course
EvaluaDons
?
 
Vocal
+
Facial
A"racDveness
=
Learning
?
Special
Thanks
To:
  Dr. Kim
  Dr. Feinberg
  Chris McAllister
  Greg Atkinson
QuesNons?
References
Apicella CL & Feinberg DR. Voice pitch alters mate-choice relevant perception in hunter-gatherers. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London B.
Apple, W., Streeter, L. A. & Krauss, R. M. (1979). Effects of pitch and speech rate on personal attributions. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 37(5), 715-727.
Brown, B.L., Strong, W.J., & Rencher A.C. (1973). Perceptions of personality from speech: effects of manipulations of
acoustical parameters. Journal of the Acoustical Soc4iety of America, 5(7), 29-35.
Feinberg, D.R. (2008). Are human faces and voices ornaments signaling common underlying cues to mate value?
Evolutionary Anthropology, 17(2), 112-118.
Hamann, D.L., Lineburgh, N. & Paul, Stephen. (1998). Teaching Effectiveness and Social Skill Development. Journal of
Research in Music Education, 46(1), 87-101.
McKinnon S.L., Hess C.W., & Landry R.G. (1986). Reactions of college students to speech disorders. Journal of
Communication Disorders, 19(1), 75-82.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information.
Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97.
Moreno, R. & Mayer, R.E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of
modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358-368.
Puts, D.A., Gaulin, S.J.C. & Verdolini, K. Dominance and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in human voice pitch. Evolution
and Human Behaviour, 27(4), 283-296.
Rogerson, J. & Dodd, B. (2005). Is There an Effect of Dysphonic Teachers’ Voices on Children’s Processing of Spoken
Language? Journal of Voice, 19(1), 47-57.
Schmidt, C.D., Andrews, M.L., & McCutcheon, J.W. (1998). An acoustical and perceptual analysis of the vocal behavior of
classroom teachers. Journal of Voice, 12(2), 434-443.
Sorden, S. (2005). A Cognitive Approach to Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning. Informing Science Journal, 8,
262-279.
Titze, I.R. (1994). Principles of Voice Production . Iowa City, IA: Prentice Hall.
Zuckerman, M. & Miyake, K. (1993). The attractive voice: what makes it so? Journal of Nonverbal Behaviour, 17(2), 119-135.