Advertisement

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 126–142 | Cite as

Talking fast and changing attitudes: A critique and clarification

  • W. Gill Woodall
  • Judee K. Burgoon
Article

Abstract

Previous research on the effects of vocal rate on credibility and persuasion has not carefully considered several methodological and theoretical issues. An investigation was conducted that controlled for a number of methodological factors, and considered different explanatory possibilities. Results indicated more complex and constrained relationships between rate of vocalization, credibility, and persuasion than some previous research had found, and were consistent with research in the person perception literature. Support for a straightforward credibility bolstering explanation was not found, and other explanatory rationales were considered.

Keywords

Social Psychology Change Attitude Theoretical Issue Person Perception Methodological Factor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference notes

  1. Burgoon, J.K., & Burgoon, M. The construction of more precise and efficient verbal rating scales. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, 1979.Google Scholar

References

  1. Addington, D.W. The relationship of selected vocal characteristics to personality perception.Speech Monographs 1968,35 492–503.Google Scholar
  2. Addington, D.W. The effect of vocal variations on ratings of source credibility.Speech Monographs 1971,38 242–247.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, R.R., Anderson, S., & Hough, J.Speech in American society. Columbus, Ohio, Charles E. Merrill, 1968.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, S.W., Bavelas, A., & Braden, M. An index to measure contingency of English sentences.Language and Speech 1961,4 139–145.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, B.L., Strong, W.J., & Rencher, A.C. Perceptions of personality from speech: Effects of manipulations of acoustical parameters.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1973,54 29–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, B.L., Strong, W.J., & Rencher, A.C. Fifty-four voices from two: The effects of simultaneous manipulations of rate, mean fundamental frequency and variance of fundamental frequency on ratings of personality from speech.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1974,55 313–318.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Burgoon, M., Cohen, M., Miller, M.D., & Montgomery, C.L. An empirical test of a model of resistance to persuasion.Human Communication Research 1978,5 27–39.Google Scholar
  8. Burgoon, M., & King, L.B. The mediation of resistance to persuasion strategies by language variables and active-passive participation.Human Communication Research 1974,1 30–41.Google Scholar
  9. Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A.H. Communication modality as a determinant of message persuasiveness and message comprehensibility.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1976,34 605–614.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, J.Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science. New York, Academic Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  11. Cronbach, L.J. Coefficient alpha and the interval structure of tests.Psychometrika 1951,16 297–334.Google Scholar
  12. Duncan, S., & Fiske, D.W.Face-to-face interaction: Research, methods, and theory. Hillsdale, N.J., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977.Google Scholar
  13. Gundersen, D., & Hopper, R. Relationship between speech delivery and speech effectiveness.Communication Monographs 1976,43 158–165.Google Scholar
  14. Kerlinger, F.M., & Pedhazur, E.J.Multiple regression in behavioral research. New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1973.Google Scholar
  15. Kiesler, C.A., Collins, B.E., & Miller, N.Attitude change: A critical analysis of theoretical approaches. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1969.Google Scholar
  16. Knapp, M.L.Nonverbal communication in human interaction. New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1978.Google Scholar
  17. Knapp, M.L., Wieman, J.M., & Daly, J.A. Nonverbal communication: Issues and appraisal.Human Communication Research 1978,4 271–280.Google Scholar
  18. LaBarbara, P., & MachLachlan, J. Time compressed speech in radio advertising.Journal of Marketing 1979,43 30–36.Google Scholar
  19. MachLachlan, J. What people really think of fast talkers.Psychology Today 1979,13 113–117.Google Scholar
  20. McCroskey, J.C., Jensen, T., & Valencia, C. Measurement of the credibility of peers and spouses. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Montreal, April, 1973.Google Scholar
  21. Mehrabian, A., & Williams, M. Nonverbal concomitants of perceived and intended persuasiveness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1969,13 37–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Miller, N., & Baron, R. On measuring counterarguing.Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 1973,3 101–118.Google Scholar
  23. Miller, N., Maruyama, C., Beaber, R., & Valone, K. Speech of speech and persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1976,34 615–624.Google Scholar
  24. Monroe, A.H., & Ehninger, D.Principles and types of speech communication (7th ed.). Glenview, Illinois, Scott Foresman, 1974.Google Scholar
  25. Osterhouse, R., & Brook, T. Distraction increases yielding to propaganda by inhibiting counterarguing.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1970,15 344–358.Google Scholar
  26. Pearce, W.B. The effect of vocal cues on credibility and attitude change.Western Speech 1971,35 167–184.Google Scholar
  27. Pearce, W.B., & Brommel, B.J. vocalic communication persuasion.Quarterly Journal of Speech 1972,58 298–306.Google Scholar
  28. Pearce, W.B., & Cronklin, F. Nonverbal vocalic communication and perceptions of a speaker.Speech Monographs 1971,38 235–241.Google Scholar
  29. Schweitzer, D.A. The effect of presentation on source evaluation.Quarterly Journal of Speech 1970,56 33–39.Google Scholar
  30. Smith, B.L., Brown, B.L., Strong, W.J., & Rencher, A.C. Effects of speech rate on personality perception.Language and Speech 1975,18 145–152.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Snedecor, G.W., & Cochran, W.G.Statistical methods. Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University Press, 1967.Google Scholar
  32. Stacks, D.W., & Burgoon, J.K. Role of nonverbal behaviors as distractors in resistance to persuasion in interpersonal contexts.Central States Speech Journal 1981,32 61–73.Google Scholar
  33. Street, R.L. Evaluation of noncontent speech accommodation.Language and Communication 1982,2 13–31.Google Scholar
  34. Street, R.L., & Brady, R.M. Speech rate acceptance ranges as a function of evaluative domain, listener speech rate, and communication context. Paper presented at the International Communication Association Convention, Boston, May, 1982.Google Scholar
  35. Street, R.L. & Giles, H. Speech accommodation theory: A social cognitive approach to language and speech behavior, in press.Google Scholar
  36. Weitz, S.Nonverbal communication: Readings with commentary. New York, Oxford University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  37. Wheeless, L.R. Some effects of time-compressed speech on persuasion.Journal of Broadcasting 1971,15 415–420.Google Scholar
  38. Winer, B.J.Statistical principles in experimental design. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1971.Google Scholar
  39. Woodall, W.G., Burgoon, J.K. The effects of nonverbal synchrony on message comprehension and persuasiveness.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 1981,5 207–223.Google Scholar
  40. Woodall, W.G., Burgoon, J.K., & Markel, N.N. The effects of facial-head cue combinations on interpersonal evaluations.Communication Quarterly 1980,28 47–55.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. Gill Woodall
    • 1
  • Judee K. Burgoon
    • 2
  1. 1.the University of New MexicoUSA
  2. 2.the University of ArizonaUSA

Personalised recommendations