These days many prefer to use 1 4 scales over 1 5

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: B: You know, we spend a lot of Cme in the mountains hikin', campin' and whatnot... EliciCng A)tudes in Matched Guise l༆  l༆  l༆  Now that we have established the “data presentaCon” part of matched guise, we can think about what we are going to ask listeners to do when they listen to the clips. We want to get some idea of what social traits listeners associate with the speech they hear. We could ask them directly, or indirectly, about these traits. Some opCons l༆  l༆  l༆  Ask listeners to generate adjecCves or descripCons about the person they hear (open- ended) Ask listeners to rate the likelihood of the speaker having various qualiCes that you list for them. Ask listeners whether they think it's likely that the speaker holds a parCcular job (an indirect measure of social class). Why indirectly measure? l༆  Why do some experimenters prefer to ask parCcipants about a speaker's job rather than about their social class? Example: Labov's 1966 NYC Study l༆  l༆  l༆  Labov played clips of five women from the Lower East Side to other Lower East Side naCves. ParCcipants asked to rate speakers' suitability for various jobs. Finding: listeners who had more negaCve responses to features were more likely to style- shi[ (to not use that feature in formal speech). Example: Campbell- Kibler (2005) l༆  l༆  l༆  Played digitally- manipulated clips of (ING) First, played clips to focus groups, asked them to describe how the people sounded. Used their answers to create a survey to sample a wider populaCon. Campbell- Kibler (2005) adjecCves l༆  She came up with 10 adjecCves: -  casual -...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/06/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online