The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction
Abstract
Would people exhibit similarity-attraction and consistency-attraction toward unambiguously computer-generated speech even when personality is clearly not relevant? In Experiment 1, participants (extrovert or introvert) heard a synthesized voice (extrovert or introvert) on a book-buying Web site. Participants accurately recognized personality cues in text to speech and showed similarity-attraction in their evaluation of the computer voice, the book reviews, and the reviewer. Experiment 2, in a Web auction context, added personality of the text to the previous design. The results replicated Experiment 1 and demonstrated consistency (voice and text personality)-attraction. To maximize liking and trust, designers should set parameters, for example, words per minute or frequency range, that create a personality that is consistent with the user and the content being presented.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Much of the relevant research has focused on imbuing voice-based, embodied, and robot-based chatbots with personalities using nonverbal cues, such as gestures [20,21] gaze [22], voice tone and speed [23], and proximity [24].”
From Interacting with a Chatbot-Based Advising System: Understanding the Effect of Chatbot Personality and User Gender on Behavior (2022) · cites this paper as [23]
Citations
Cites
Picard, R. W. (1997) · MIT Press · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1140.001.0001 · Cited by 7,382
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-3702 · Cited by 4,872
Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers
Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00153 · Cited by 4,022
Self-citationA psychological taxonomy of trait‐descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain
Wiggins, J. S. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.395 · Cited by 1,596
Speech style and social evaluation
Giles, H., & Powesland, P. F. (1975) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,192
Aronson, E. (1972) · Cited by 931
The elements of computer credibility
Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/302979.303001 · Cited by 880
The Illusion of Life: Disney Animation
Thomas, F. R., & Johnston, O. (1995) · Cited by 738
Are Machines Gender Neutral? Gender‐Stereotypic Responses to Computers With Voices
Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Green, N. (1997) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00275.x · Cited by 670
Self-citationCan computer personalities be human personalities?
Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B. B., & Dryer, D. C. (1995) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.1995.1042 · Cited by 621
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Fiske, 1991, Social cognition.
- Langer, 1989, Mindfulness.
- Scherer, 1979, Personality markers in speech., 147
- Slobin, 1979, Psycholinguistics
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392 · Cited by 6,605
Using linguistic cues for the automatic recognition of personality in conversation and text
Mairesse, F., Walker, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Moore, R. K. (2007) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.2349 · Cited by 1,046
Feil-Seifer, D., & Matarić, M. J. (2005) · International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics · doi:10.1109/icorr.2005.1501143 · Cited by 1,048
Social signal processing: Survey of an emerging domain
Vinciarelli, A., Pantic, M., & Bourlard, H. (2009) · Image and Vision Computing · doi:10.1016/j.imavis.2008.11.007 · Cited by 842
Scherer, K. R., Schuller, B., & Elkins, A. (2017) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316676202 · Cited by 768
Metadata
- Authors
- Nass, C., & Lee, K. M.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 171-181
- ISSN
- 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-2192
- OpenAlex
- W2164772857
- Semantic Scholar
- 97c709ce30c43e4333a89c78d4a48e7b4ce06693
- Cited by
- 522
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 9.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- similarity attraction, person perception, text-to-speech, trust, liking, online reviews, online auctions, extraversion-introversion, speech rate, frequency range
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Extraversion, Psychological, Female, Humans, Introversion, Psychological, Male, Social Perception, Speech Acoustics, Speech Perception, Internet
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
