↓ Skip to main content

Authentic and Play-Acted Vocal Emotion Expressions Reveal Acoustic Differences

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Authentic and Play-Acted Vocal Emotion Expressions Reveal Acoustic Differences
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00180
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Jürgens, Kurt Hammerschmidt, Julia Fischer

Abstract

Play-acted emotional expressions are a frequent aspect in our life, ranging from deception to theater, film, and radio drama, to emotion research. To date, however, it remained unclear whether play-acted emotions correspond to spontaneous emotion expressions. To test whether acting influences the vocal expression of emotion, we compared radio sequences of naturally occurring emotions to actors' portrayals. It was hypothesized that play-acted expressions were performed in a more stereotyped and aroused fashion. Our results demonstrate that speech segments extracted from play-acted and authentic expressions differ in their voice quality. Additionally, the play-acted speech tokens revealed a more variable F(0)-contour. Despite these differences, the results did not support the hypothesis that the variation was due to changes in arousal. This analysis revealed that differences in perception of play-acted and authentic emotional stimuli reported previously cannot simply be attributed to differences in arousal, but by slight and implicitly perceptible differences in encoding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 2 2%
Germany 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 87 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 28%
Student > Master 13 14%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 6%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Linguistics 9 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 19 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,157,376
of 25,621,213 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,345
of 34,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,611
of 191,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#56
of 242 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,621,213 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,698 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 191,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 242 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.