↓ Skip to main content

Voices to reckon with: perceptions of voice identity in clinical and non-clinical voice hearers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Voices to reckon with: perceptions of voice identity in clinical and non-clinical voice hearers
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00114
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johanna C. Badcock, Saruchi Chhabra

Abstract

The current review focuses on the perception of voice identity in clinical and non-clinical voice hearers. Identity perception in auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH) is grounded in the mechanisms of human (i.e., real, external) voice perception, and shapes the emotional (distress) and behavioral (help-seeking) response to the experience. Yet, the phenomenological assessment of voice identity is often limited, for example to the gender of the voice, and has failed to take advantage of recent models and evidence on human voice perception. In this paper we aim to synthesize the literature on identity in real and hallucinated voices and begin by providing a comprehensive overview of the features used to judge voice identity in healthy individuals and in people with schizophrenia. The findings suggest some subtle, but possibly systematic biases across different levels of voice identity in clinical hallucinators that are associated with higher levels of distress. Next we provide a critical evaluation of voice processing abilities in clinical and non-clinical voice hearers, including recent data collected in our laboratory. Our studies used diverse methods, assessing recognition and binding of words and voices in memory as well as multidimensional scaling of voice dissimilarity judgments. The findings overall point to significant difficulties recognizing familiar speakers and discriminating between unfamiliar speakers in people with schizophrenia, both with and without AVH. In contrast, these voice processing abilities appear to be generally intact in non-clinical hallucinators. The review highlights some important avenues for future research and treatment of AVH associated with a need for care, and suggests some novel insights into other symptoms of psychosis.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 118 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 12%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 26 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 58 48%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Neuroscience 7 6%
Engineering 4 3%
Linguistics 3 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2013.
All research outputs
#6,876,801
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,586
of 7,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,938
of 294,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#344
of 861 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,702 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 861 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.