Advertisement

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 133–149 | Cite as

Laugh Like You Mean It: Authenticity Modulates Acoustic, Physiological and Perceptual Properties of Laughter

  • Nadine Lavan
  • Sophie K. Scott
  • Carolyn McGettigan
Original Paper

Abstract

Several authors have recently presented evidence for perceptual and neural distinctions between genuine and acted expressions of emotion. Here, we describe how differences in authenticity affect the acoustic and perceptual properties of laughter. In an acoustic analysis, we contrasted spontaneous, authentic laughter with volitional, fake laughter, finding that spontaneous laughter was higher in pitch, longer in duration, and had different spectral characteristics from volitional laughter that was produced under full voluntary control. In a behavioral experiment, listeners perceived spontaneous and volitional laughter as distinct in arousal, valence, and authenticity. Multiple regression analyses further revealed that acoustic measures could significantly predict these affective and authenticity judgements, with the notable exception of authenticity ratings for spontaneous laughter. The combination of acoustic predictors differed according to the laughter type, where volitional laughter ratings were uniquely predicted by harmonics-to-noise ratio (HNR). To better understand the role of HNR in terms of the physiological effects on vocal tract configuration as a function of authenticity during laughter production, we ran an additional experiment in which phonetically trained listeners rated each laugh for breathiness, nasality, and mouth opening. Volitional laughter was found to be significantly more nasal than spontaneous laughter, and the item-wise physiological ratings also significantly predicted affective judgements obtained in the first experiment. Our findings suggest that as an alternative to traditional acoustic measures, ratings of phonatory and articulatory features can be useful descriptors of the acoustic qualities of nonverbal emotional vocalizations, and of their perceptual implications.

Keywords

Laughter Authenticity Phonation Acoustics Non-verbal vocalizations Nasality 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Gary McKeown and one anonymous reviewer for thoughtful and constructive comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. Stimulus recording and data collection for Experiment 1 was supported by a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellowship (WT090961MA) awarded to Sophie Scott.

References

  1. Bachorowski, J. A., & Owren, M. J. (2001). Not all laughs are alike: Voiced but not unvoiced laughter readily elicits positive affect. Psychological Science, 12(3), 252–257.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bachorowski, J.-A., Smoski, M. J., & Owren, M. J. (2001). The acoustic features of human laughter. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 110, 1581–1597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banse, R., & Scherer, K. R. (1996). Acoustic profiles in vocal emotion expression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 614–636.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2010). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 5.1.13.Google Scholar
  5. Bryant, G. A., & Aktipis, C. (2014). The animal nature of spontaneous human laughter. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 327–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: Murray.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Krom, G. (1995). Some spectral correlates of pathological breathy and rough voice quality for different types of vowel fragments. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 794–811.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Drolet, M., Schubotz, R. I., & Fischer, J. (2012). Authenticity affects the recognition of emotions in speech: Behavioral and fMRI evidence. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(1), 140–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Drolet, M., Schubotz, R. I., & Fischer, J. (2013). Explicit authenticity and stimulus features interact to modulate BOLD response induced by emotional speech. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 13(2), 318–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Drolet, M., Schubotz, R. I., & Fischer, J. (2014). Recognizing the authenticity of emotional expressions: F0 contour matters when you need to know. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 144.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Edmonson, M. S. (1987). Notes on laughter. Anthropological Linguistics, 29(1), 23–34.Google Scholar
  12. Eskenazi, L., Childers, D. G., & Hicks, D. M. (1990). Acoustic correlates of vocal quality. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 298–306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferrand, C. T. (2002). Harmonics-to-noise ratio: An index of vocal aging. Journal of Voice, 16(4), 480–487.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Gervais, M., & Wilson, D. S. (2005). The evolution and functions of laughter and humor: A synthetic approach. Quarterly Review of Biology, 80, 395–451.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gobl, C., & Nί, C. A. (2003). The role of voice quality in communicating emotion, mood and attitude. Speech Communication, 40(1), 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Habermann, G. (1955). Physiologie und Phonetik des lauthaften Lachens. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.Google Scholar
  17. Juslin, P., & Laukka, P. (2003). Communication of emotions in vocal expression and music performance: Different channels, same code? Psychological Bulletin, 129, 770–814.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kohler, K. J. (2008). “Speech—Smile”, “Speech—Laugh”, “Laughter” and their sequencing in dialogic interaction. Phonetica, 65, 1–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Laukka, P., Juslin, P., & Bresin, R. (2005). A dimensional approach to vocal expression of emotion. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 633–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McGettigan, C., Walsh, E., Jessop, R., Agnew, Z. K., Sauter, D. A., Warren, J. E., & Scott, S. K. (2015). Individual differences in laughter perception reveal roles for mentalizing and sensorimotor systems in the evaluation of emotional authenticity. Cerebral Cortex, 25(1), 246–257.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. McKeown, G., & Curran, W. (2015). The Relationship between laughter intensity and perceived humour. In Proceedings of the 4th interdisciplinary workshop on laughter and other non-verbal vocalisations in speech, Enschede, Netherlands (pp. 27–29).Google Scholar
  22. McKeown, G., Sneddon, I., & Curran, W. (2015). Gender differences in the perceptions of genuine and simulated laughter and amused facial expressions. Emotion Review, 7(1), 30–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Narayanan, S., Nayak, K., Lee, S. B., & Byrd, D. (2004). An approach to real-time magnetic resonance imaging for speech production. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 115, 1771–1776.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Niedenthal, P. M., Mermillod, M., Maringer, M., & Hess, U. (2010). The Simulation of Smiles (SIMS) model: Embodied simulation and the meaning of facial expression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(06), 417–433.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Parsa, V., & Jamieson, D. G. (2001). Acoustic discrimination of pathological VoiceSustained vowels versus continuous speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44(2), 327–339.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Provine, R. R. (1993). Laughter punctuates speech: Linguistic, social and gender contexts of laughter. Ethology, 95(4), 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Provine, R. R. (2001). Laughter: A scientific investigation. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Provine, R. R. (2012). Curious behavior: Yawning, laughing, hiccupping, and beyond. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Provine, R. R., & Yong, Y. L. (1991). Laughter: A stereotyped human vocalization. Ethology, 89(2), 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruch, W., & Ekman, P. (2001). The expressive pattern of laughter. In A. W. Kaszniak (Ed.), Emotion, qualia, and consciousness (pp. 426–443). Tokyo: Word Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sauter, D., Eisner, F., Calder, A. J., & Scott, S. K. (2010). Perceptual cues in nonverbal vocal expressions of emotion. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(11), 2251–2272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scherer, K. R. (1986). Vocal affect expression: A review and a model for future research. Psychological Bulletin, 99(2), 143.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Scherer, K. R., Johnstone, T., & Klasmeyer, G. (2003). Vocal expression of emotion. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.) Handbook of Affective Sciences (pp. 433–456) New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  34. Scott, S. (2013). Laughter-the ordinary and the extraordinary. Psychologist, 26(4), 264–268.Google Scholar
  35. Scott, S. K., Lavan, N., Chen, S., & McGettigan, C. (2014). The social life of laughter. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(12), 618–620.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Scott, S. K., Young, A. W., Calder, A. J., Hellawell, D. J., Aggleton, J. P., & Johnson, M. (1997). Impaired auditory recognition of fear and anger following bilateral amygdala lesions. Nature, 385, 254–257.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. (1972). A comparative approach to the phylogeny of laughter and smiling. In R. A. Hinde (Ed.), Non-verbal communication (pp. 209–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Vettin, J., & Todt, D. (2004). Laughter in conversation: Features of occurrence and acoustic structure. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Warhurst, S., Madill, C., McCabe, P., Heard, R., & Yiu, E. (2012). The vocal clarity of female speech-language pathology students: An exploratory study. Journal of Voice, 26(1), 63–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Wild, B., Rodden, F. A., Grodd, W., & Ruch, W. (2003). Neural correlates of laughter and humour. Brain, 126(10), 2121–2138.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nadine Lavan
    • 1
  • Sophie K. Scott
    • 2
  • Carolyn McGettigan
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyRoyal Holloway, University of LondonEghamUK
  2. 2.Institute of Cognitive NeuroscienceUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations