Cited by 407Animal Vocal Communication and BehaviorPhonetics and Phonology ResearchMarine animal studies overview

The contribution of source–filter theory to mammal vocal communication research

Open access
Taylor, A. M., Reby, D.·2010·Journal of Zoology

Abstract

The field of animal vocal communication has benefited greatly from improved understanding of vocal production mechanisms and specifically from the generalization of the source–filter theory of speech production to non-human mammals. The application of the source–filter theory has enabled researchers to decompose the acoustic structure of vocal signals according to their mode of production and thereby to predict the acoustic variation that is caused by anatomical or physiological attributes of the caller. The source–filter theory states that vocal signals result from a two-stage production, with the glottal wave generated in the larynx (the source), being subsequently filtered in the supralaryngeal vocal tract (the filter). This theory predicts that independent indexical information such as body size, weight, age and sex can be contained in both the glottal wave (mostly characterized by its fundamental frequency), and the spectral envelope of the radiated vocalization (mostly characterized by the vocal tract resonances or formant frequencies). Additionally, physiological fluctuations in emotional or motivational state have been found to influence the acoustic characteristics of signals in a reliable and predictable manner that is perceptually available to receivers. While animal vocalizations contain some dynamic attributes, their static attributes are sufficient to provide an effective means of acoustic individual discrimination both within and across call types. In this paper, we draw together a wealth of experimental work conducted within the source–filter framework over the last decade and we review how such experiments have elucidated the communicative value of animal vocalizations.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00661.x

Cites

175 of 175 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Conceptual work on sequence structure, mammalian source-filter theory, and signal embedding in social networks provides a theoretical foundation for interpreting meaning in animal vocalizations.

    “Conceptual work on sequence structure (Kershenbaum et al. 2016), mammalian source–filter theory (Taylor and Reby 2010), and signal embedding in social networks (Seyfarth and Cheney 2017; Snijders and Naguib 2017) provide a theoretical foundation.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Hirano, M. (1981). Clinical examinations of voice. Vienna: Springer Verlag.
  2. Lieberman, P. (1977). Speech physiology and acoustic pho- netics. Cambridge: Cambridge Unniversity Press.
  3. Maynard Smith, L. & Harper, D. (2003). Animal signals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Taylor, A.M., Reby, D. & McComb, K. (2009b). Size com- munication in domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) growls. Anim. Behav., in press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Taylor, A. M., & Reby, D.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Taylor, A. M.
Venue
Journal of Zoology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02-09
Volume
280
Issue
3
Pages
221-236
ISSN
  • 0952-8369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7998
OpenAlex
W1510835889
Cited by
407
References
175
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 21
FWCI
9.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Zoology (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
Keywords
source-filter model, animal vocal communication, formant frequencies, fundamental frequency, vocal tract resonance

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