Stern Steven E, Chobany Chelsea M, Patel Disha V, Tressler Justin J
Department of Psychology.
Department of Biology, University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.
Rehabil Psychol. 2014 Aug;59(3):289-97. doi: 10.1037/a0036663.
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: There are few controlled experimental studies that examine reactions to people with speech disabilities. We conducted 2 studies designed to examine participants' reactions to persuasive appeals delivered by people with physical disabilities and mild to moderate dysarthria.
RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: Research participants watched video clips delivered by actors with bona fide disabilities and subsequently rated the argument, message, and the speaker. The first study (n = 165) employed a between-groups design that examined reactions to natural dysarthric speech, synthetic speech as entered into a keyboard by hand, and synthetic speech as entered into a keyboard with a headwand. The second study (n = 27) employed a within-groups design that examined how participants reacted to natural dysarthric speech versus synthetic speech as entered into a keyboard by hand.
Both of these studies provide evidence that people rated the argument, message, and speaker more favorably when people with disabilities used synthetic speech than when they spoke in their natural voice.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The implications are that although people react negatively to computer-synthesized speech, they prefer it to and find it more persuasive than the speech of people with disabilities. This appears to be the case even if the speech is only moderately impaired and is as intelligible as the synthetic speech. Hence, the decision to use synthetic speech versus natural speech can be further complicated by an understanding that even the intelligible speech of people with disabilities leads to more negative reactions than synthetic speech.
目的/目标:很少有对照实验研究考察人们对言语残疾者的反应。我们进行了两项研究,旨在考察参与者对身体残疾且患有轻至中度构音障碍者所做的有说服力的呼吁的反应。
研究方法/设计:研究参与者观看了由真正有残疾的演员所播放的视频片段,随后对论点、信息和演讲者进行评分。第一项研究(n = 165)采用组间设计,考察对自然构音障碍语音、手动输入键盘的合成语音以及使用头部操纵杆输入键盘的合成语音的反应。第二项研究(n = 27)采用组内设计,考察参与者对自然构音障碍语音与手动输入键盘的合成语音的反应。
这两项研究均提供了证据,表明当残疾者使用合成语音时,人们对论点、信息和演讲者的评分比对他们用自然声音说话时更有利。
结论/启示:这意味着,尽管人们对计算机合成语音反应消极,但比起残疾者的语音,他们更喜欢合成语音,且认为其更具说服力。即便语音仅受到中度损害且与合成语音一样易懂,情况似乎也是如此。因此,鉴于人们认识到即使是残疾者易懂的语音也会比合成语音引发更多负面反应,那么在决定使用合成语音还是自然语音时可能会进一步复杂化。