The Curious Case of Impersonators and Singers: Telling Voices Apart and Telling Voices Together under Naturally Challenging Listening Conditions.

Vocal identity processing depends on the ability to two instances of different speakers whilst also being able to two instances of the same speaker. Whilst previous research has examined these voice processing capabilities under relatively common listening conditions, it has not yet tested the limits of these capabilities. Here, two studies are presented that employ challenging listening tasks to determine just how good we are at these voice processing tasks. In Experiment 1, 54 university students were asked to distinguish between very similar sounding, yet different speakers (celebrity targets and their impersonators). Participants completed a 'Same/Different' task and a 'Which is the Celebrity?' task to pairs of speakers, and a 'Real or Not?' task to individual speakers. In Experiment 2, a separate group of 40 university students was asked to pair very different sounding instances of the same speakers (speaking and singing). Participants were presented with an array of voice clips and completed a 'Pairs Task' as a variant of the more traditional voice sorting task. The results of Experiment 1 suggested that significantly more mistakes were made when distinguishing celebrity targets from their impersonators than when distinguishing the same targets from control voices. Nevertheless, listeners were significantly better than chance in all three tasks despite the challenge. Similarly, the results of Experiment 2 suggested that it was significantly more difficult to pair singing and speaking clips than to pair two speaking clips, particularly when the speakers were unfamiliar. Again, however, the performance was significantly above zero, and was again better than chance in a cautious comparison. Taken together, the results suggest that vocal identity processing is a highly adaptable task, assisted by familiarity with the speaker. However, the fact that performance remained above chance in all tasks suggests that we had not reached the limit of our listeners' capability, despite the considerable listening challenges introduced. We conclude that voice processing is far better than previous research might have presumed.