Modeling Self-Reported and Observed Affect from Speech

被引:7
作者
Cheng, Jian [1 ]
Bernstein, Jared [1 ]
Rosenfeld, Elizabeth [1 ]
Foltz, Peter W. [2 ,3 ]
Cohen, Alex S. [4 ]
Holmlund, Terje B. [5 ]
Elvevag, Brita [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Analyt Measures Inc, Palo Alto, CA 94301 USA
[2] Univ Colorado, Inst Cognit Sci, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
[3] Pearson, Centennial, CO USA
[4] Louisiana State Univ, Dept Psychol, Baton Rouge, LA 70803 USA
[5] Univ Tromso, Dept Clin Med, Tromso, Norway
[6] Univ Hosp North Norway, Norwegian Ctr eHlth Res, Tromso, Norway
来源
19TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPEECH COMMUNICATION ASSOCIATION (INTERSPEECH 2018), VOLS 1-6: SPEECH RESEARCH FOR EMERGING MARKETS IN MULTILINGUAL SOCIETIES | 2018年
关键词
positive affect; negative affect; arousal; valence; mental health; NEGATIVE AFFECT; EMOTION; RECOGNITION; PANAS;
D O I
10.21437/Interspeech.2018-2222
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Listeners hear joy/sadness and engagement/indifference in speech, even when linguistic content is neutral. We measured audible emotion in spontaneous speech and related it to self reports of affect in response to questions, such as "Are you hopeful?" Spontaneous speech and self-reports were both collected in sessions with an interactive mobile app and used to compare three affect measurements: self-report; listener judgement; and machine score. The app adapted a widely-used measure of affective state to collect self-reported positive/negative affect, and it engaged users in spoken interactions. Each session elicited 11 affect self-reports and captured about 9 minutes of speech; with 118 sessions by psychiatric patients and 227 sessions by non-clinical users. Speech recordings were evaluated for arousal and valence by clinical experts and by computer analysis of acoustic (non-linguistic) variables. The affect self reports were reasonably reliable (a 0.73 to 0.84). Combined affect ratings from clinical-expert listeners produced reliable ratings per session (a 0.75 to 0.99), and acoustic feature analysis matched the expert ratings fairly well (0.36 < r < 0.72, mean 0.57), but neither human nor computed scores had high correlation with standard affect self-reported values. These results are discussed in relation to common methods of developing and evaluating affect analysis.
引用
收藏
页码:3653 / 3657
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2009, SIGKDD Explorations, DOI DOI 10.1145/1656274.1656278
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Proceedings of the 21st ACM International Conference on Multimedia, DOI DOI 10.1145/2502081.2502224
[3]  
[Anonymous], AMBULATORY VOC UNPUB
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2011, ACM T INTEL SYST TEC, DOI DOI 10.1145/1961189.1961199
[5]  
Asgari Meysam, 2014, Proc IEEE Int Conf Acoust Speech Signal Process, V2014, P965, DOI 10.1109/ICASSP.2014.6853740
[6]  
Bradley M., 2000, SER AFFECTIVE SCI, P242
[7]  
Busso C, 2008, INTERSPEECH 2008: 9TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL SPEECH COMMUNICATION ASSOCIATION 2008, VOLS 1-5, P257
[8]   The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): Construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample [J].
Crawford, JR ;
Henry, JD .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2004, 43 :245-265
[9]  
Cronbach LJ, 1951, PSYCHOMETRIKA, V16, P297
[10]  
Darley FL, 1975, Motor speech disorders, V1st