Explorando os dois lados do cérebro: a percepção holística da fala reversa (PHFR) sob a perspectiva forense

Albuquerque da Silva

Resumo


Quando se reverte um sinal de fala, observam-se distorções em vários níveis linguísticos, bem como drásticas mudanças em suas características perceptivas. Informações fonéticas das estruturas segmentais e suprassegmentais são definitivamente perdidas. Contornos de energia e curvas de F0 são revertidas e, como resultado, o conteúdo da enunciação é obscurecido de tal forma que o  que resta em nada lembra a língua original onde foram feitos os enunciados. Apesar das distorções, muitos parâmetros são mantidos, como, por exemplo,  F0 médio,  contorno de F0, valores médios dos formantes, espectro de longo termo  e qualidade de voz. De acordo com os resultados da primeira pesquisa internacional sobre práticas de Comparação Forense de Locutor, a frequencia fundamental   e a  qualidade de voz são os parâmetros  suprassegmentais mais usados e, além disso,  a qualidade de voz é considerada o parâmetro  de maior poder discriminativo.  A tarefa de reconhecimento  da voz  é um processo de interação entre  a  análise fonétca componencial e uma tarefa de  reconhecimento de padrão. Em virtude de se reter parâmetros importantes  para  tarefa de discriminação sem nenhum  benefício de sugestões   semanticas ou contextuais,  a comparação de amostras reversas de fala  é uma tarefa cujos processos psyco – perceptivos subjacentes operam de forma holística .  Nesse artigo, abordamos a percepção holística da fala reversa, de acordo com os dados cientificos disponíveis  ,  mostrando que a natureza ambígua desse estímulo, ao manter parametros altamente discriminativos,   possibilita o seu uso na etapa perceptiva dos exames   de Fonética Forense como procedimento alternativo em testes cegos por agrupamento.

Abstract

When a speech signal is reversed, there are distortions at various linguistic levels, as well as drastic changes in its perceptual characteristics. Phonetic information of the segmental and suprasgmental structures are definitely lost. Energy contours and F0 curves are reversed, and as a result, the content of the enunciation is obscured in such a way that what remains in no way resembles the original language in which the utterances were made.. Despite the distortions, many parameters are maintained, such as F0 average, F0 contour, mean values of formants, long term spectrum and voice quality. According to the results of the first international survey on Forensic Speech Comparison practices, fundamental frequency and voice quality are the most widely used suprassegmental parameters and in addition voice quality is considered the parameter of highest discriminative power for almost the totality of the research participants. The task of voice recognition is a process of interaction between componencial phonetic analysis and a pattern recognition task. Because retaining important parameters for discrimination task with no benefit from semantic or contextual cues, comparison of speech samples is a pattern recognition task whose underlying psycho - perceptual processes operate in a holistic way (Gestalt processing). In this article, we approach the holistic perception of reverse speech, according to available scientific data, showing that the ambiguous nature of this stimulus, by maintaining highly discriminative parameters, can be used in Forensic Speaking Comparison caseworks, as an alternative procedure in blind  grouping.


 

Palavras-chave


psicolinguística; neurolinguística; psicoacústica; Comparação Forense de Locutor; criminalística; psycholinguistics; neurolinguistics; psychoacoustics; forensic speaker comparison; criminalistics.

Texto completo:

PDF

Referências


Morrison, G.S. Forensic voice comparison. In Expert Evidence 99, 1ed. London : Thompson Reuters, 2010. Chap.99, p.1051

Rose, P. J. (2002). Forensic Speaker Identification, Taylor & Francis , London & New York..

Jessen, M. (2008). “Forensic phonetics,” Lang. and Ling. Compass 2, 671–711Hollien, H. Considerations of guidelines for earwitness lineups. Forensic Linguistics, 1986 ,3, 14-23;

E.San Segundo, P.Foulks, J.P French, P. Harrison, &V. Hughes, “Voice quality analysis in forensic comparison:developing the vocal profile analysis scheme” in IAFPA 2016- Annual Conference of the International Association of Forensic Phonetic and Acoustics, July 24-27, York, UK .2016

Hirano,M.(1981).“GRBAS” scale for evaluating the hoarse voice & frequency range of phonation. In M. Hirano (Ed.),Clinical examination of voice (Vol.5,pp.83 – 84, 88 – 89). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag/ Wien

Hollien H, Didla G., Harnsberger J.D., Hollien K.A. (2016). The case for aural perceptual speaker identification. Forensic Science International, 269, pp. 5-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2016.08.007

Laver, John. The phonetic description of voice quality. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics London, v. 31, p. 1-186, 1980.

Wertheimer, M. Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. Psychologische Forschung, 1923, 4, 301–350.

Wertheimer, M. (1938). Laws of organization in perceptual forms. In W. D. Ellis (Ed.), A source book of Gestalt psychology (pp. 71-88). London, England: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Company.

Forstl, H, “ The dilemma of localizing language: John Abercombie ‘s unexploited evidence”, Brain and language , 40:145-150, 1991

Broca, P. Sur la faculté du langage articule. Bulletin of Social Anthropology. 6: 493-94.1865

Bever, T.G. (1975). Cerebral asymetries in humans are due to the differentiation of two incompatible processes: Holistic and analytic. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 263, 251-262. DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb41589. x

Van Lancker, D. (1991). Personal relevance and the human right hemisphere.Brain & Cognition,17, 64–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Van Lancker, D. R. & Canter, G. J. Impariment of voice and face recognition in patients with hemispheric damage. Brain Cogn. 1, 185–195 ( 1982).

Van Lancker, D., Kreiman, J., &Emmorey, K. (1985). Familiar voice recognition: Patterns and parameters: Part I. Recognition of backward voices.Journal of Phonetics,13, 19–38.Google Scholar

Van Lancker, P., Kreiman, J., &Wickens, T. (1985). Familiar voice recognition: Patterns and parameters. Part II. Recognition of ratealtered voices.Journal of Phonetics,13, 39–52.Google Scholar

Van Lancker, D., &Kreiman, J. (1987). Voice discrimination and recognition are separate abilities.Neuropsychologia,25,829–854. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Van Lancker, D. R., Cummings, J. L., Kreiman, J., & Dobkin, B. H. (1988). Phonagnosia: A dissociation between familiar and unfamiliar voices. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 24(2), 195-209.

Formisano E, De Martino F, Bonte M, Goebel R (2008) “Who” is saying “what”? Brain-based decoding of human voice and speech. Science 322: 970–973.

Ladefoged, P. & Ladefoged, J (1980). The ability of listeners to identify voices. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 49; 43-51

Kisilevsky BS, Hains SM, Lee K, Xie X, Huang H, Ye HH, Zhang K, Wang Z 2003 Effects of experience on fetal voice recognition. Psychol Sci 14: 220–224.

Papcun, G., Kreiman, J. & Davis, A. Long-term memory for unfamiliar voices. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85, 913–925 (1989).

Hollien, H. Considerations of guidelines for earwitness lineups. Forensic Linguistics, 1986 ,3, 14-23;

Kreiman, J., and Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2011). Foundations of Voice Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Voice Production and Perception (John Wiley and Sons, Chichester).

Gold, Erica; French, Peter. International practices in forensic speaker comparison. International Journal of Speech, Language & the Law, v. 18, n. 2, 2011.

Lathi, Bhagwandas Pannalal. Linear Systems and Signals, Second Edition. Oxford University Press, 2005

French, P. and Stevens, L. (2013). Forensic speech science. In M. Jones and R. Knight,Eds.,The Bloomsbury Companion to Phonetics. London: Bloomsbury

FOULKS P. and French P. (2012). Forensic phonetic speaker comparison. In Solan, I. and Tiersma, P. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Language and Law

Abercrombie, D. Elements of General Phonetics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1967

TITZE, I.R and Martin, D.W. Principles of voice production Acoustical Society of America Journal, 104, 3 (1998), 1148.

Lass, R. (1984). Phonology: an introduction to basic concepts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nolan , F. Forensic speaker identification and the phonetic description of voice quality. In W.J. Hardcastle & J. Mackenzie Beck (Eds.). A figure of speech. A festschrift for John Laver (pp.385-411). Mahwah. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Passetti, R. R . O efeito do telefone celular no sinal da fala : uma análise fonético - acústica com implicações para a verificação de locutor em português brasileiro. (Mestrado em Linguística)

Rose, P.J (2003). Effect of telephone transmission . In: Selby H. & Freckelton I. (eds.). Expert Evidence. Sydney: Thomson Lawbook Company, 2003.

Knösche, T. R., Lattner, S., Maess, B., Schauer, M., & Friederici, A. D.(2002). Early parallel processing of auditory word and voice information.NeuroImage,17, 493 1503

Hammarberg B, Fritzel B, Gauffin J. Sundberg J, Wedin L Perceptual and acoustics correlates of abnormal voice qualities. Acta Otolaryngol

Hart DA, Hans S, Vassière J, Brassnu DA. Objective acoustic and aerodynamic measures of breathiness in paralytic dysphonia. Eur Arch Otorynolaringol, 2003; 260(4); 175-82

Kaganovich, N., Francis, A. L., & Melara, R. D. (2006). Electrophysiological evidence for early interaction between talker and linguistic information during speech perception. Brain Research, 1114,161–172

Andics A, McQueen JM, Petersson KM, Gál V, Rudas G, Vidnyánszky Z. Neural mechanisms for voice recognition. NeuroImage. 2010;52:1528–1540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.048.

Kreiman J, Gerratt BR, Ito M. When and why listeners disagree in voice quality assessment tasks. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America. 2007;122:2354–2364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.2770547. [PubMed]

Latinus M, McAleer P, Bestelmeyer PEG, Belin P. Norm-based coding of voice identity in human auditory cortex. Current Biology. 2013;23:1075–1080. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.055. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Lavner Y, Rosenhouse J, Gath I. The prototype model in speaker identification by human listeners. International Journal of Speech Technology. 2001;4:63–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1009656816383.

Li, X., & Pastore, R. E.(1995). Perceptual constancy of a global spectral property: Spectral slope discrimination. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98, 1956–1968.

Melara RD, Marks LE. Interaction among auditory dimensions: Timbre, pitch, and loudness. Perception and Psychophysics.1990;48:169–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03207084. [PubMed

Bregman,A.S., 1990. Auditory Scene Analysis.MIT Press, Cambridge,MA

Caesar, Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic War 155 (51 B.C.E) . Frederick Holland Dewey ed. Translation Publishing Co. 1918

William J. The Principles of Psychology. H. Holt and company; 1890.

Charlton, D; Fraser-Mackenzie, PAF; Dror, IE; (2010) Emotional Experiences and Motivating Factors Associated with Fingerprint Analysis. JOURNAL OF FORENSIC SCIENCES , 55 (2) pp. 385-393. 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01295.x.

Whitman, G., & Koppl, R (2010). Rational Bias in forensic science. Law, probability and risk, 9(1)

S. M. Kassin, I. E. Dror, J. Kukucka, "The forensic confirmation bias: Problems perspectives and proposed solutions", J. Appl. Res. Memory Cognit., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 42-52, Mar. 2013.

Laubstein, A.S (1997). Problems of voice line-ups. Forensic Linguistics, 4, 262-279

Fraser, H. (2003). Issues in transcription: factors affecting the reliability of transcripts as evidence in legal cases. International Journal of Speech, Language and Law- Forensic Linguistics

Fraser, H., Stevenson, B., & Marks, T. (2011). Interpretation of a crisis call: persistence of a primed perception of a disputed utterance.

Fraser, H. , & Australia , F.P (2014). Transcription of indistinct forensic recordings: Problems and solutions from the perspective of phonetic science . Language and Law/ Linguagem e Direito. Disponível em http://ler.letras.up.pt/uploads/ficheiros/13353.´pdf.

Morrison, G. S., Lindh, J. & Curran, J. M. (2014). Likelihood ratio calculation for a disputed - utterance analysis with limited available data. Speech Communication , 58, 81- 90.

Delgado Romero, Carlos. La identificación de locutores en el ámbito forense. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Servicio de Publicaciones, 2004.

Cambier-Langeveld T (2007) Current methods in forensic speaker identification: results of a collaborative exercise. Int J Speech Lang Law 14(2):223–243

Rhodes, R (2014). Cognitive bias in forensic speech science. Proceedings of IAFPA 2014, Zürich, Switzerland.Pholab.uzh.ch

Findley, K. A, & Scott, M. S (2006). Multiple Dimensions of Tunnel Visions in Criminal Cases. The Wis. L. Rev, 291

Warren, R. (1999). Auditory Perception: A New Analysis and Synthesis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).

Ladefoged P. ‘Expectation affects identification by listening’ Language and Speech. 1978;21(4):373–4

Cambier-Langeveld,M;Rossum,M.V;Vermeulen,J Whose Voice is that? In: Caspers, Johaneke, Yiya, Willemijn Heeren, Jos Pacilly, Niels O. Schiller and Ellen van Zanten(eds), Above and Beyond the Segments: Experimental Linguistics and phonetics, 2014.xii, 363 pp. (pp.14-27)

M Sundqvist, T Leinonen, J Lindh, J Åkesson Blind Test Procedure to Avoid Bias in Perceptual Analysis For Forensic Speaker Comparison Casework in IAFPA 2017- Annual Conference of the International Association of Forensic Phonetic and Acoustics, July 9-12, Spli, Croatia .2017

Lindh, J., & Morrison, G. S Humans Versus Machine: Forensic Voice Comparison on a Small Database of Swedish Voice Recordings . ICPhS XVII, 2011, Hong Kong: 17-21.

Kunzel, H.J (1987) Sprechererkennung: Grundzuge forensicher Sprachverarbeitung. Heidelberg: Kriminalistik Verlag.

Kunzel, H.J (1995) ‘Field procedures in forensic speaker recognition’ . in Lewis (ed.) (1995): 68-84.

French, J.P (1994) ‘An overview of forensic phonetics with particular reference to speaker identification’. FL ½ 169-84




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15260/rbc.v8i1.348

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.