4.6 Article

Emotion appraisal dimensions inferred from vocal expressions are consistent across cultures: a comparison between Australia and India

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 4, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.170912

关键词

acoustic parameters; appraisal; cross-cultural; emotion recognition; speech; vocal expression

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council [2006-1360, 2012-801]
  2. United States National Science Foundation [BCS-0617624]
  3. Australian Research Council [FT120100053]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explored the perception of emotion appraisal dimensions on the basis of speech prosody in a cross-cultural setting. Professional actors from Australia and India vocally portrayed different emotions (anger, fear, happiness, pride, relief, sadness, serenity and shame) by enacting emotion-eliciting situations. In a balanced design, participants from Australia and India then inferred aspects of the emotion-eliciting situation from the vocal expressions, described in terms of appraisal dimensions (novelty, intrinsic pleasantness, goal conduciveness, urgency, power and norm compatibility). Bayesian analyses showed that the perceived appraisal profiles for the vocally expressed emotions were generally consistent with predictions based on appraisal theories. Few group differences emerged, which suggests that the perceived appraisal profiles are largely universal. However, some differences between Australian and Indian participants were also evident, mainly for ratings of norm compatibility. The appraisal ratings were further correlated with a variety of acoustic measures in exploratory analyses, and inspection of the acoustic profiles suggested similarity across groups. In summary, results showed that listeners may infer several aspects of emotion-eliciting situations from the non-verbal aspects of a speaker's voice. These appraisal inferences also seem to be relatively independent of the cultural background of the listener and the speaker.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据