Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 39, Issue 1, pp 79–92 | Cite as

The Principle of Distinctive and Contrastive Coherence of Prosody in Radio News: An Analysis of Perception and Recognition

Original Paper

Abstract

The prosodic features of a message are key factors in the transmission of information by radio. Some authors have demonstrated that perception and proper comprehension of radio news depend largely on the intonation, stress and speech rate used by the broadcaster. The aim of this study, therefore, is to determine the degrees of perception and recognition of information broadcast by radio when the prosodic features used in the transmission are modified. The main conclusion reached is that there is indeed a relationship between the prosodic combination employed and the way in which such information is perceived and recognized, and providing that the prosodic features observe the principle of distinctive and contrastive coherence, the information is perceived positively and recognition is highest.

Keywords

Prosody Radio News Intonation Stress Speech rate 

References

  1. Bean, C., Folkins, J. W., & Cooper, W. E. (1989). The effects of emphasis on passage comprehension. Journal of Speech Hearing Research, 32, 707–712.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beighley, K. C. (1954). An experimental study of the effect of three speech variables on listener comprehension. Speech Monographs, 21, 248–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bock, J. K., & Mazzella, J. R. (1983). Intonational marking of given and new information: Some consequences for comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 11, 64–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boersma P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 5.3.60). http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat
  5. Bolinger, D. (1982). The network tone of voice. Journal of Broadcasting, 26(3), 725–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, A. (2003). Broadcast journalism. Techniques of radio and television news. Oxford: Focal Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brazil, D. (1978). Discourse intonation II. English language research. Birmingham, UK: University of Birmingham Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, G. (1983). Prosodic structure and the given/new distinction. In D. R. Ladd & A. Cutler (Eds.), Prosody: Models and measurements (pp. 6–78). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Chantler, P., & Stewart, P. (2003). Basic radio journalism. Oxford: Focal Press.Google Scholar
  10. Collins, S. A. (2000). Men’s voices and women’s choices. Animal Behaviour, 60(6), 773–780.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cruttenden, A. (1997). Intonation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Kuthy, K., & Meurers, D. (2010). Focus in German: Towards a corpus-based study. Proceedings of Linguistic Evidence, 2010, 1–5.Google Scholar
  13. De-la-Mota, C., & Rodero, E. (2010). Intonation and accent in radio newscasters. XXXIX Simposio Internacional de la Sociedad Española de Lingüística (SEL). Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar
  14. Evans, E. (1977). Radio: A guide to broadcasting techniques. London: Barrie and Jenkins.Google Scholar
  15. Forbes, M. (2004). Voice in radio news. Doctoral Thesis, Lisbon: Universidad Nova de Lisboa.Google Scholar
  16. Francuz, P. (2010). The impact of audio information intonation on understanding television news content. Psychology of Language and Communication, 14(1), 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Freiden, J. B. (1984). Advertising spokesperson effects: An examination of endorser type and gender on two audiences. Journal of Advertising Research, 24, 33–41.Google Scholar
  18. Goldman, J. P., Auchlin, A., Simon, A. C., & Avanzi, M. (2007). Phonostylographe: A tool for prosodic description. Comparison of radio news and read style. Nouveaux Cahiers de Linguistique Française, 28, 219–237.Google Scholar
  19. Goldstein, H. (1940). Reading and listening comprehension at various controlled rate. Contributions to Education, 821.Google Scholar
  20. Grosz, B. J., & Sidner, C. L. (1986). Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12(3), 175–204.Google Scholar
  21. Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3, 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hills, G. (1987). News on radio and television. Madrid: IORTV.Google Scholar
  23. Hincks, R. (2004). Processing the prosody of oral presentations. Proceedings of InSTIL/ICALL2004NLP and Speech Technologies in Advanced Language Learning Systems, Venice.Google Scholar
  24. Kohler, K. (1991). Terminal accent patterns in single accent utterances of German: Phonetics, phonology, and semantics. In K. Kohler (Ed.), Studies on German intonation (pp. 115–186). Kiel, Germany: AIPUK 25.Google Scholar
  25. McCollum & Spielman Research. (1986). Screen actors guild voice-over study. New York: McCollum/Spielman.Google Scholar
  26. McGregor, J., & Palethorpe, S. (2008). High rising tunes in Australian English: The communicative function of L* and H* pitch accent onsets. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 28(2), 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McLeish, R. (1995). Radio production. Oxford: Focal Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nelson, H. E. (1948). The effect of variation of rate on the recall by radio listeners of “straight” newscasts. Communication Monographs, 15(2), 173–180.Google Scholar
  29. Nichols, R. G. (1948). Factors in listening comprehension. Communication Monographs, 15(2), 154–163.Google Scholar
  30. Nihalani, P., & Po Lin, T. (1998). Intonation patterns in news broadcasts. World Englishes, 17(1), 15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pierrehumbert, J., & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In P. Cohen, J. Morgan, & M. Pollack (Eds.), Intentions in Communication (pp. 271–311). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. Price, J., (2008). New news old news: A sociophonetic study of spoken Australian English. News Broadcast Speech. AAA, Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 33 (2), 285-310.Google Scholar
  33. Rodero, E. (2006). Analysis of intonation in news presentation on television. ExLing, 2006, 209–212.Google Scholar
  34. Rodero, E. (2007). Characterization of a proper news presentation in the audio-visuals messages. Estudios del Mensaje Periodístico, 13, 523–542.Google Scholar
  35. Rodero, E. (2013). Peculiar styles when narrating the news: The intonation of radio news bulletins. Estudios Sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 19(1), 519–532.Google Scholar
  36. Rodero, E., Larrea, O., & Vázquez, M. (2013). Male and female voices in commercials: Analysis of effectiveness, adequacy for product, attention and recall. Sex Roles, 68(5), 349–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Strangert, E. (1991). Phonetic characteristics of professional news reading. Perilus, 13, 39–43.Google Scholar
  38. Taylor, D. S. (1993). Intonation and accent in English: What teachers need to know. IRAL, XXXI (1).Google Scholar
  39. Tench, P. (1990). The roles of intonation in English discourse. Germany: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  40. Terken, J., & Nooteboom, S. G. (1994). Opposite effects of accentuation and deaccentuation on verification latencies for given and new information. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(3/4), 145–163.Google Scholar
  41. Utterback, A. S. (2000). Broadcast voice handbook. Chicago: Bonus Book.Google Scholar
  42. Van Leeuwen, T. (1984). Impartial speech: Observations on the intonation of radio newsreader. Australian Journal Cultural Studies, 2(1), 84–98.Google Scholar
  43. Wheatley, K. E. (1949). Anomalies of radio speech. American Speech, 24(3), 213–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whipple, T. W., & McManamon, M. K. (2002). Implications of using male and female voices in commercials: An exploratory study. Journal of Advertising, 31(2), 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Whittaker, S., & Whittaker, R. (1976). Relative competence of male and female newscasters. Journal of Broadcasting, 20, 177–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zuckerman, M., & Miyake, K. (1993). The attractive voice: What makes it so? Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27(2), 119–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CommunicationUniversitat Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Institute for Communication ResearchIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations