| Abstract: | Two experiments are reported in which participants attempted to reject the tape‐recorded voice of a stranger and identify by name the voices of three personal associates who differed in their level of familiarity. In Experiment 1 listeners were asked to identify speakers as soon as possible, but were not allowed to change their responses once made. In Experiment 2 listeners were permitted to change their responses over successive presentations of increasing durations of voice segments. Also, in Experiment 2 half of the listeners attempted to identify speakers who spoke in normal‐tone voices, and the remainder attempted to identify the same speakers who spoke in whispers. Separate groups of undergraduate students attempted to predict the performance of the listeners in both experiments. Accuracy of performance depended on the familiarity of speakers and tone of speech. A between‐subjects analysis of rated confidence was diagnostic of accuracy for high familiar and low familiar speakers (Experiment 1), and for moderate familiar and unfamiliar normal‐tone speakers (Experiment 2). A modified between‐subjects analysis assessed across the four levels of familiarity yielded reliable accuracy‐confidence correlations in both experiments. Beliefs about the accuracy of voice identification were inflated relative to the significantly lower actual performance for most of the normal‐tone and whispered‐speech conditions. Forensic significance and generalizations are addressed. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
