International practices in forensic speaker comparison

Erica Gold, Peter French

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The results of the first international survey on forensic speaker comparison practices are presented in this article. Thirty-six experts from thirteen countries and five continents responded to a series of questions concerning their practices in casework. Despite the responses revealing a range of differences, there is, nevertheless, a reasonably strong convergence with respect to the importance assigned to particular speech features, methodology and choice of framework for expressing conclusions. Practices and preferences revealed by the survey are discussed in the context of constraints imposed by the institutions and jurisdictions within which the participants are situated, and in relation to contemporary trends and developments within forensic speech science.

LanguageEnglish
Pages293-307
Number of pages15
JournalInternational Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
Volume18
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

First International
casework
jurisdiction
expert
methodology
trend
science

Cite this

@article{28ca6aac01f947bebfe7d599da37d902,
title = "International practices in forensic speaker comparison",
abstract = "The results of the first international survey on forensic speaker comparison practices are presented in this article. Thirty-six experts from thirteen countries and five continents responded to a series of questions concerning their practices in casework. Despite the responses revealing a range of differences, there is, nevertheless, a reasonably strong convergence with respect to the importance assigned to particular speech features, methodology and choice of framework for expressing conclusions. Practices and preferences revealed by the survey are discussed in the context of constraints imposed by the institutions and jurisdictions within which the participants are situated, and in relation to contemporary trends and developments within forensic speech science.",
keywords = "Conclusion frameworks, Features, Forensic speaker comparison, International practices, Methodology, Survey",
author = "Erica Gold and Peter French",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1558/ijsll.v18i2.293",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "293--307",
journal = "International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law",
issn = "1748-8885",
publisher = "Equinox Publishing Ltd",
number = "2",

}

International practices in forensic speaker comparison. / Gold, Erica; French, Peter.

In: International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011, p. 293-307.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - International practices in forensic speaker comparison

AU - Gold, Erica

AU - French, Peter

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - The results of the first international survey on forensic speaker comparison practices are presented in this article. Thirty-six experts from thirteen countries and five continents responded to a series of questions concerning their practices in casework. Despite the responses revealing a range of differences, there is, nevertheless, a reasonably strong convergence with respect to the importance assigned to particular speech features, methodology and choice of framework for expressing conclusions. Practices and preferences revealed by the survey are discussed in the context of constraints imposed by the institutions and jurisdictions within which the participants are situated, and in relation to contemporary trends and developments within forensic speech science.

AB - The results of the first international survey on forensic speaker comparison practices are presented in this article. Thirty-six experts from thirteen countries and five continents responded to a series of questions concerning their practices in casework. Despite the responses revealing a range of differences, there is, nevertheless, a reasonably strong convergence with respect to the importance assigned to particular speech features, methodology and choice of framework for expressing conclusions. Practices and preferences revealed by the survey are discussed in the context of constraints imposed by the institutions and jurisdictions within which the participants are situated, and in relation to contemporary trends and developments within forensic speech science.

KW - Conclusion frameworks

KW - Features

KW - Forensic speaker comparison

KW - International practices

KW - Methodology

KW - Survey

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864833292&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1558/ijsll.v18i2.293

DO - 10.1558/ijsll.v18i2.293

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 293

EP - 307

JO - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

T2 - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

JF - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

SN - 1748-8885

IS - 2

ER -