Using Regional Accents to Form First Impressions of a Speaker

1
Using Regional Accents to Form First Impressions
of a Speaker

• Benjamin Paciorkowski and Michaelia Gilbert
• Hanover College

2
First Impression Formation

• First Impression Formation
• Ambady Rosenthal (1993)
• Participants rated professors after watching a 30
  second clip.
• Participants first impressions predicted
  students end of the semester evaluations (r
  .76)

3
Accent Effects

• In a review of the literature, Fuertes, Potere
  and Ramirez (2002) found speech accents have
  been shown to affect the listeners evaluations
  of speakers competence, social status, social
  attractiveness, personality, and similarity to
  the listener.

4
Accent Effects and Stereotyping

• Purnell, Idari Baugh (1999)
• Found that listeners discriminated against a
  speaker searching for an apartment based upon the
  speakers accent.

5
In-group Preferences

• Preston (1998) found that when participants were
  asked to rate a speaker according to
  pleasantness those speakers who received the
  highest rating were those accents that most
  closely mirrored the participants.
• Participants from Michigan rated their accent and
  the region in which their accent is found as
  having a normal or acceptable accent, while
  giving poorer ratings to those areas in which
  Southern or New York City accents are found
  (Preston, 1998).

6
Hypothesis 1

• Participants ratings of the speaker will reflect
  regional stereotypes (e.g., A Southern speaker
  will be rated as more likely to use tobacco
  products).

7
Hypothesis 2

• As a group, participants will rate the Midwestern
  accent as most familiar and as having more
  desirable characteristics.
• In the United States many have suggested that the
  standard accent is a hybrid of the Midwestern
  accent, and is most often the accent used by
  national news anchors (Hammel, 1999).

8
Hypothesis 3

• Participants ratings will also reflect in-group
  preferences, such that participants will rate
  speakers from an area closest in distance to
  their own region as more similar to themselves
  and as having more desirable characteristics

9
Method

• Study was conducted online via Dr. John Krantzs
  Psychological Research on the Net.
• (http//www.psych.hanover.edu/research/exponnet.ht
  ml)
• Obtained informed consent.
• Participants listened to a sound clip of one of
  five randomly assigned accents
• Boston, Midwestern, Southern, Minnesotan and
  Californian

10
Speakers Script

• I was in the park just the other day. The sun was
  out and there were almost no clouds in sight. The
  grass seemed greener and the water seemed bluer,
  making it a great day for a walk. However, the
  walk was soon turned into a run as the sky filled
  with clouds. I ran for cover hoping not to get
  soaked. Luckily, I made it just as it started to
  pour. Its amazing how fast the weather can
  change. Next time I walk, Im bringing my
  umbrella.

11
Method

• Participants rated the speaker using a survey
• i.e. How likely is the speaker to use tobacco
  products?
• Ranked on a 1 to 7 Likert Scale
• Participants completed a demographics survey and
  received a debriefing form.
• Asked for participants hometown and current zip
  codes.

12
Participants

• N 136
• Originally 147
• 28 males
• 106 females
• Age
• Range 18-78
• Mean 24.5

• Race
• 104 Caucasian
• 8 African American
• 7 Hispanic
• 6 Asian American
• 6 Other

13
Results

• Analysis
• Regression analyses with effect coding for
  accent.
• Important to Note
• Only analyzed the Boston, Midwestern and Southern
  accents.
• N 78

14
Results First Hypothesis

• Results support our first hypothesis that
  participants would rate the speaker based upon
  regional stereotypes.

15
Results Tobacco Use
Grand Mean 3.188
16
Results Rural Environment
Grand Mean 4.030
17
Results Calling in Sick to Work
Grand Mean 2.607
18
Results Second Hypothesis

• Results also support our second hypothesis that
  participants would rate the Midwestern accent as
  having more desirable characteristics.

19
Results Level of Education
Grand Mean 3.348
20
Results Criminality
Grand Mean 2.957
21
Results Third Hypothesis

• Our results are contrary to our third hypothesis
  that participants would rate those accents
  closest in distance to their own location more
  favorably than those accents farthest from their
  location.

22
Results Honesty Family Orientation

• Participants rated the speaker as more honest and
  more family-oriented as distance from the
  participants hometown increased.
• Honesty
• b .303, t(72) 2.271, p .026
• Family Oriented
• b .306, t(71) 2.27, p .026

23
Discussion

• Accent does play a role in first impression
  formation.
• Participants were picking up on differences in
  the various accents and rating the speaker
  accordingly

24
Limitations

• Most of our participants were unable to correctly
  identify the Minnesotan or Californian accent.
• Our accents may not have been believable to
  participants already familiar with the regional
  accent they were assigned.

25
Future Directions

• Try to use accents that are more representative
  of their respective regions.
• Use a larger variety of accents from each region.
• Look at how gender and accent interact.

26
Questions?