Charismatic Speech CS 4706 What is Charisma The ability to attract, in addition to retain

Charismatic Speech CS 4706 What is Charisma The ability to attract, in addition to retain

Charismatic Speech CS 4706 What is Charisma The ability to attract, in addition to retain

Walters, Sarah, Meteorologist has reference to this Academic Journal, PHwiki organized this Journal Charismatic Speech CS 4706 What is Charisma The ability to attract, in addition to retain followers by virtue of personal characteristics – not traditional or political office (Weber ‘47) E.g. G in addition to hi, Hitler, Castro, Martin Luther King Jr., Personalismo What makes an individual charismatic (Bird ’93, Boss ’76, Dowis ’00, Marcus ’67, Touati ’93, Tuppen ’74, Weber ‘47) Their message Their personality Their speaking style

Eastern Kentucky University US

This Particular University is Related to this Particular Journal

What is Charismatic Speech Circularly Speech that leads listeners to perceive the speaker as charismatic What aspects of speech might contribute to the perception of a speaker as charismatic Content of the message Lexico-syntactic features Acoustic-prosodic features Why Study Charismatic Speech It’s an interesting phenomenon To identify potential charismatic leaders To provide a feedback system as long as individuals who want to improve their speaking style – politicians, professors, students To create a charismatic Text-to-Speech system Our Approach Collect tokens of charismatic in addition to non-charismatic speech from a small set of speakers on a small set of topics Ask listeners to rate the ‘The speaker is charismatic’ plus statements about a number of other attributes (e.g. The speaker is boring, charming, persuasive, ) Correlate listener ratings with lexico-syntactic in addition to acoustic-prosodic features of the tokens to identify potential cues to perception of charisma

American English Perception Study Data: 45 2-30s speech segments, 5 each from 9 c in addition to idates as long as Democratic nomination as long as U.S. president in 2004 2 ‘charismatic’, 2 ‘not charismatic’ Topics: greeting, reasons as long as running, tax cuts, postwar Iraq, healthcare 4 genres: stump speeches, debates, interviews, ads 8 subjects rated each segment on a Likert scale (1-5) as long as 26 questions in a web survey Duration: avg. 1.5 hrs, min 45m, max ~3hrs Results: How Much Do Subjects Agree with Each Other Over all statements Using weighted kappa statistic with quadratic weighting, mean = 0.207 On the charismatic statement = 0.232 (8th most agreed upon statement) By token No significant differences across all tokens By statement Individual statements demonstrate significantly different agreements (most agreement: The speaker is accusatory, angry, passionate, intense; least agreement: The speaker is trustworthy, believable, reasonable, trustworthy) Results: What Do Subjects Mean by Charismatic Which other statements are most closely correlated with the charismatic statement (determined by kappa): a functional definition

Results: Does Whether a Subject Agrees with the Speaker or Finds the Speaker ‘Clear’ Affect Charisma Judgments Whether a subject agrees with a token does not correlate highly with charisma judgments ( = 0.30) Whether a subject finds the token clear does not correlate highly with charisma judgments ( = 0.26) Results: Does the Identity of the Speaker Affect Judgments of Charisma There is a significant difference between speakers (p=2.20e-2) Most charismatic Rep. John Edwards (mean 3.86) Rev. Al Sharpton (3.56) Gov. Howard Dean (3.40) Least charismatic Sen. Joseph Lieberman (2.42) Rep. Dennis Kucinich (2.65) Rep. Richard Gephardt (2.93) Results: Does Recognizing a Speaker Affect Judgments of Charisma Subjects asked to identify which, if any, speakers they recognized at the end of the study. Mean number of speakers believed to have been recognized, 5.8 Subjects rated ‘recognized’ speakers as significantly more charismatic than those they did not (mean 3.39 vs. mean 3.30).

Results: Does Genre or Topic Affect Judgments of Charisma Recall that tokens were taken from debates, interviews, stump speeches, in addition to campaign ads Genre does influence charisma ratings (p=.0004) Stump speeches were the most charismatic (3.38) Interviews were the least (2.96) Topic does affect ratings of charisma significantly (p=.0517) Healthcare > post-war Iraq > reasons as long as running neutral > taxes What makes Speech Charismatic Features Examined Duration (secs, words, syls) Charismatic speech is personal: Pronoun density Charismatic speech is contentful: Function/content word ratio Charismatic speech is simple: Complexity: mean syllables/word (Dowis) Disfluencies Repeated words Min, max, mean, stdev F0 (Boss, Tuppen) Raw in addition to normalized by speaker Min, max, mean, stdev intensity Speaking rate (syls/sec) Intonational features: Pitch accents Phrasal tones Contours Results: Lexico-Syntactic Correlates of Charisma Length: Greater number of words positively correlates with charisma (r=.13; p=.002) Personal pronouns: Density of first person plural in addition to third person singular pronouns positively correlates with charisma (r=.16, p=0; r=.16, p=0) Third person plural pronoun density correlates negatively with charisma (r=-.19,p=0) Content: Ratio of adjectives/all words negatively correlates with charisma (r=-.12,p=.008) Complexity: Higher mean syllables/word positively correlates with charisma (p=.034)

Disfluency: greater % negatively correlates with charisma (r=-.18, p=0) Repetition: Proportion of repeated words positively correlates with charisma (r=.12, p=.004) Results: Acoustic-Prosodic Correlates of Charisma Pitch: Higher F0 (mean, min, mean HiF0, over male speakers) positively correlates with charisma (r=.24,p=0;r=.14 p=0;r=.20,p=0) Loudness: Mean rms in addition to sdev of mean rms positively correlates with charisma (r=.21,p=0;r=.21,p=0) Speaking Rate: Faster overall rate (voice/unvoiced frames) positively correlates with charisma (r=.16,p=0) Duration: Longer duration correlates positively with charisma (r=.09,p=.037) Length of pause: sdev negatively correlates with charisma (r=-.09,p=.004)

Results: Intonational Correlates of Charisma (H in addition to -Annotated Features) Pitch Accent Type: Positive correlation with !H in addition to L+H accents (r=.09,p=0;r=.09,p=.034) Negative correlation with L, H in addition to L+H accents (r=-.13,p=.002;r=-.11,p=.014;r=-.08,p=.052) Phrasal Types Negative correlation with !H-L% in addition to !H- endings (r=-.11,p=.015;r=-.10,p=.026) Summary as long as American English In St in addition to ard American English, charismatic speakers tend to be those also highly rated as long as enthusiasm, charm, persuasiveness, passionateness in addition to convincingness – they are not thought to be boring Charismatic utterances tend to be longer than others, to contain a lower ratio of adjectives to all words, a higher density of first person plural in addition to third person singular pronouns in addition to fewer third person plurals, fewer disfluencies, a larger percentage of repeated words, in addition to more complex words than non-charismatic utterances Charismatic utterances are higher in pitch (mean, min) with more regularity in pause length, louder with more variation in intensity, faster, in addition to with more !H in addition to L+H accents in addition to fewer L, H, in addition to L+H accents in addition to fewer !H- in addition to !H-L% phrasal endings

Replication of Perception Study from Text Alone Lower statement agreement, much less on charismatic statement, different speakers most/least charismatic `Agreement with speaker’, genre in addition to topic had stronger correlations Lexico-syntactic features show weaker correlations 1st person pronoun density negatively correlated in addition to complexity not at all Similar to speech experiment as long as duration, function/content, disfluencies, repeated words Hypothesis: Charisma is a Culture-Dependent Phenomenon People of different languages in addition to cultures perceive charisma differently In particular, they perceive charisma in speech differently Do Arabic listeners respond to American politicians the same way Americans do Do Americans hear Swedish professors the same way Swedish students do Charismatic Speech in Palestinian Arabic Are these tokens charismatic: Are these:

Walters, Sarah KPNX-TV Meteorologist

Palestinian Arabic Perception Study Same paradigm as as long as SAE Materials: 44 speech tokens from 22 male native-Palestinian Arabic speakers taken from Al-Jazeera TV talk shows Two speech segments extracted as long as each speaker from the same topic (one we thought charismatic in addition to one not) Web as long as m with statements to be rated translated into Arabic Subjects: 12 native speakers of Palestinian Arabic Data How Does Charisma Differ in Arabic Subjects agree on judgments a bit more (=.225) than as long as English (=.207) but still low Agree most on clarity of msg, enthusiasm, charisma, intensity – all differing from Americans Agree least on desperation (as Amer), friendliness, ordinariness, spontaneity of speaker Charisma statement correlates (positively) most strongly with speaker toughness, powerfulness, persuasiveness, charm, in addition to enthusiasm in addition to negatively with boringness

Role of speaker identity important in judgments of charisma in Arabic as in English Most charismatic speakers: Ibrahim Hamami (4.75), Azmi Bishara (4.42), Mustafa Barghouti (4.33) Least: Shafiq Al-Hoot (3.10), Mohammed Al-Tamini (3.42), Azzam Al-Ahmad (3.33) Raters claimed to recognize only .55 (of 22) speakers on average, perhaps because the speakers were less well known than the Americans Topic important in charisma ratings (r=0,p=.043) Israeli separation wall > assassination of Hamas leader > debates among Palestinian groups > the Palestinian Authority in addition to calls as long as re as long as m > the Intifada in addition to resistance Lexical Cues to Charisma Length in words positively correlates with charisma, as as long as Americans Disfluency rate negatively correlates, as as long as Americans Repeated words positively correlates with charisma, as as long as Americans Presence of Arabic ‘dialect markers’ (words, pronunciations) negatively correlates with charisma Density of third person plural pronouns positively correlates w/ charisma – differing from Americans Acoustic/Prosodic Cues to Charisma Duration positively correlated with charisma, as as long as Americans Speaking rate approaches negative correlation – opposite from American But rate of the fastest intonational phrase in the token positively correlated as long as both languages Sdev of rate across intonational phrases positively correlated as long as charisma in Arabic Pauses pauses/words ratio positively correlated with charisma but not as long as Americans

Arabic Prosody – most common contours Arabic Prosody – Disfluency In addition to st in addition to ard disfluency: Hesitations filled pauses self-repairs In Arabic, speakers could produce a sequence of all of the above. (see praat: file: 1036 in addition to 2016) Disfluency may disconnect prepositions in addition to conjunctions from the content word: => w- l- uh- yEny uh- tty instead of wltty

Walters, Sarah Meteorologist

Walters, Sarah is from United States and they belong to KPNX-TV and they are from  Phoenix, United States got related to this Particular Journal. and Walters, Sarah deal with the subjects like Meteorology

Journal Ratings by Eastern Kentucky University

This Particular Journal got reviewed and rated by Eastern Kentucky University and short form of this particular Institution is US and gave this Journal an Excellent Rating.