Charismatic Speech Andrew Rosenberg Spoken Language Processing 4 24 06 Overview Background Previous Work Speech Study Text Study Conclusion Future Work Overview Background What is charisma Does charismatic speech exist Charismatic Speech vs Emotional Speech Why study charismatic speech Previous Work Speech Study Text Study Conclusion Future Work Background What is charisma What do I mean by charisma Not closed door charisma Rather political or religious charisma The ability to attract and retain followers by virtue of personality as opposed to tradition or laws Weber E g Ghandi Hitler Che Guevara Charismatic speech Speech that encourages listeners to perceive the speaker as charismatic Background Is there such a thing as charismatic speech Pro Potential charismatic leaders must communicate with would be followers Charismatic leaders have historically had a particular gift at public speaking Hitler MLK Jr Castro Con Charisma as a relationship between leader and followers The mythologizing of a charismatic leader extends beyond public address Background Charismatic speech vs Emotional speech Similarities Paralinguistic phenomena Not represented the traditional syntax semantics pragmatics paradigm Can be studied in the same way via perceptual studies Differences Charisma is not a speaker state Social context of charisma Personal attitudes towards charisma Background Why study charismatic speech General scientific interest Feedback system for politicians and academic instructors Identification of potential charismatic leaders Automatic generation of charismatic like speech Overview Background Previous Work C Tuppen Dimensions of Communicator Credibility An oblique solution A Hamilton B Stewart Extending an Information Processing Model of Language Intensity Effects Speech Study Text Study Conclusion Future Work Previous Work Tuppen Christopher Tuppen Dimensions of communicator credibility An oblique solution Speech Monographs 41 1974 101 subjects read a booklet containing ten character sketches Student professor ad exec farmer unethical businessman doctor ret Army officer man of religion hippie tv personality Topics how much sleep you need marijuana and health duration of US envolvement in SE Asia and tuition at State Colleges The subjects rated each communicator on 64 scales 28 bipolar adjective 36 seven point Likert scales Previous Work Tuppen 2 The subject ratings were grouped using cluster analysis Cluster 1 Trustworthiness Trustworthy honest safe dependable reputable etc Cluster 2 Expertise Qualified skilled informed experienced etc Cluster 3 Dynamism Bold active aggressive strong emphatic etc Previous Work Tuppen 3 Cluster 4 Co orientation Created a favorable impression stood for a group whose interests coincided with the rater represented acceptable values was someone to whom the rater would like to listen Cluster 5 Charisma Convincing reasonable right logical believable intelligent whose opinion is respected whose background is admired in whom the reader has confidence Previous Work Hamilton Stewart 1 M Hamilton B Stewart Extending an Information Processing Model of Language Intensity Effects Communication Quarterly 41 2 1993 How forceful should my language be in order to maximize my social influence I e what is the relationship between language intensity and persuasion Previous Work Hamilton Stewart 2 Intensity is expressed by manipulating two language features emotionality and specificity Emotionality degree of affect present in the language Ranges from stolid displays to histrionics Specificity degree to which precise reference is made to attitude objects Attitude change is a product of message discrepancy perceived source credibility and message strength fsd a c a attitude f force s source credibility d discrepancy c counterargument impact parameter Previous Work Hamilton Stewart 3 518 subjects presented with a persuasive message with manipulated intensity The message s language was evaluated on 11 terms using a 7 point bipolar adjective scale Intense strong active extreme forceful emotional vivid vigorous powerful assertive potent Perceived source competence trustworthiness and dynamism were assessed Previous Work Hamilton Stewart 4 Correlations between subject ratings and manipulated features were calculated using a causal modeling program PATH 42 Extremity of position 32 Manipulated 64 intensity Perceived 78 intensity 52 Source Source dynamism competence 18 charisma sequence 73 Source trustworthiness Overview Background Previous Work Speech Study Questions Description Results Text Study Conclusion Future Work Speech Study Questions Do subjects agree about what is charismatic What do subjects mean by charismatic What makes speech charismatic Speech Study Description Subjects Friends and colleagues no incentive Interface Presentation of 45 short speech segments 2 30secs via a web form Dependent variables 5 point Likert scale ratings of agreement on 26 statements Duration avg 1 5 hrs min 45m max 3hrs Speech Study Description Interface http www1 cs columbia edu amaxwell survey Speech Study Description Materials 45 tokens of American political speech Speakers 9 Candidates for Democratic Party s nomination for President Clark Dean Edwards Gephardt Kerry Kucinich Lieberman Mosley Braun Sharpton Topics Postwar Iraq Healthcare Bush s Tax plan Reason for Running Content Neutral Speech Study Description Example Tokens 1 2 3 4 Speech Study Results Inter subject agreement Using the weighted kappa statistic with quadratic weighting mean kappa was 0 213 Inter subject agreement by token No significant differences across all tokens Inter subject agreement by statement The individual statements demonstrate significantly different agreements Speech Study Results Least consistent statements Most consistent statements The speaker is accusatory 0 512 The speaker is trustworthy 0 037 The speaker is passionate 0 458 The speaker is reasonable 0 070 The speaker is intense 0 431 The speaker is believable 0 074 The speaker is angry 0 404 The speaker is desperate 0 076 The speaker is ordinary 0 115 The speaker is enthusiastic 0 362 Charisma 0 224 8th Speech Study Results Statement Co occurrence Using the kappa statistic determined which pairs of statements were most closely correlated with the charismatic statement The speaker is enthusiastic 0 606 The speaker is charming 0 602 The speaker is persuasive 0 561 The speaker is boring 0 513 The speaker is passionate 0 512 The speaker is convincing 0