Mistaking minds and machines: How speech affects dehumanization and anthropomorphism.
Level 2 - randomized trial
Series of individual randomized experimental trials
PubMed 27513307 · doi:10.1037/xge0000214
What was done
Across four randomized experiments, researchers tested how speech and paralinguistic cues influence whether an audience attributes communication to a human or a machine. Participants evaluated communications presented in different modalities: text only, spoken voice with natural intonation, spoken voice stripped of natural pitch and pacing cues, or subtitled video showing a human performing the script.
What was found
The abstract reports directional findings without numeric data, effect sizes, or test statistics. Hearing thoughts spoken in a voice made participants more likely to infer a human creator compared to reading the same thoughts in text. Adding visual cues via subtitled video did not increase inferences of a human creator compared to text alone. Removing naturalistic paralinguistic cues, such as varied pace and intonation, eliminated the humanizing effect of speech.
Why it matters
These findings suggest that natural voice cues are key signals for inferring personhood, which may explain why text-only communication facilitates dehumanization while voice-enabled interfaces promote anthropomorphism.
Limits
The abstract does not report sample sizes, participant demographics, numerical statistics, or effect sizes. Generalizability beyond laboratory judgments of scripted communication remains unmeasured.
Cited by
- supports When people hear an opposing political partisan's voice rather than reading their text transcript, they evaluate the person as more thoughtful, intelligent, rational, and less dehumanized.