Summary: Accents shape how people are perceived, and this new research shows that voices judged as “lower status” are more likely to be assumed guilty of crimes. In a study of 180 UK listeners, participants rated voices representing ten regional accents on social traits and the likelihood of carrying out various behaviours, including criminal acts. The results reveal a clear connection between perceived social status from speech and assumptions about criminality, raising concerns about accent-based bias in the criminal justice system.
The study underlines how working-class accents are frequently linked with negative assumptions, while standard southern British English (SSBE) tends to be seen as higher status. The researchers recommend measures such as pre-testing to screen for voice bias and new guidelines for handling voice evidence so that accent stereotypes do not distort legal outcomes.
Key facts
- Accent stereotypes: Accents perceived as lower status are associated with higher assumed criminality.
- Status outweighs warmth: Perceived social status from an accent predicted assumptions about criminal behaviour more strongly than perceived trustworthiness, kindness or honesty.
- Justice implications: Authors suggest pre-testing and clearer procedures for voice evidence to reduce accent-based prejudice in legal settings.
Research overview
Researchers working on the ESRC-funded Improving Voice Identification Procedures project studied how listeners’ stereotypes about regional accents translate into expectations about behaviour. They recruited 180 participants across the UK and divided them into two survey groups. One group rated voices on ten social traits, and the other rated how likely each voice was to carry out ten behaviours—five criminal acts and five moral or anti-social behaviours such as defending a harassment victim or committing infidelity.
The team produced thirty-second audio collages from recordings of male speakers in ten distinct accents: Belfast, Birmingham, Bradford, Bristol, Cardiff, Glasgow, Liverpool, London, Newcastle and Standard Southern British English (SSBE). To reduce unintended cues, the collages removed names and were standardized for speaking rate, pitch and intensity. Phoneticians reviewed the samples to ensure they were representative of the accents tested.
Findings
Analysis of participant responses revealed clear patterns. Trait ratings grouped into two main clusters—‘solidarity’ (traits like kindness) and ‘status’ (traits like wealth)—and two smaller clusters labelled ‘confident’ and ‘working class’. The ‘working class’ cluster opposed the ‘status’ cluster: SSBE scored highest for status and confidence and lowest on working-class traits.
Most criminal behaviours clustered together: accents rated higher in status were generally judged less likely to commit these crimes. Sexual assault, however, did not cluster with most crimes; instead it grouped with morally negative but not strictly illegal actions, a pattern the authors describe as ‘morally bad’. In the study, London and Liverpool speakers were rated more likely to display morally bad behaviours, while Glasgow and Belfast speakers were rated less likely.
Importantly, perceiving a voice as unlikely to commit a crime did not always mean the voice was seen as especially prosocial. For example, although the SSBE speaker was judged less likely to commit most crimes than the Liverpool speaker, SSBE was also rated less likely to intervene to defend a victim of harassment. The researchers emphasize they found a stronger link between perceived criminality and perceived working-class traits than between criminality and perceived kindness or trustworthiness.
Implications and next steps
The authors stress the forensic importance of these findings. Accent-based stereotypes could bias witnesses, jurors and practitioners who encounter voice evidence, producing unfair outcomes. The research team is drafting guidelines for voice line-ups and supports pre-testing to detect and mitigate voice bias before evidence is presented in legal contexts.
They also note limitations and directions for further work: the study used male voices only, and future research should include more speakers of different genders and examine how the strength of an accent affects judgments. Some uncontrolled vocal characteristics might also have influenced perceptions, so further controlled studies are recommended.
About this psychology research news
Author: Angharad Brewer Gillham
Source: Frontiers
Contact: Angharad Brewer Gillham – Frontiers
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News
Original research: Open access. “Stereotyped accent judgements in forensic contexts: listener perceptions of social traits and types of behaviour” by Alice Paver et al., published in Frontiers in Communication.
Abstract
This study, produced by the Improving Voice Identification Procedures (IVIP) project, examines how accent-based stereotypes transfer into expectations about criminal and non-criminal behaviour. One hundred eighty participants rated ten regionally-accented British voices across traits and behaviours, using a broader set of accents and offences than prior work. Results show that perceived characteristics derived from accents shape listeners’ judgments about likely actions: non-standard regional accents tend to attract more negative evaluations than a standard accent, though this pattern is not uniform. Accents perceived as low-status were generally judged more likely to behave criminally, with variation across offence types. The paper discusses the forensic implications of the link between perceived status and criminality and highlights the particular patterns observed for perceptions of sexual offending compared with other offences. The authors call for a nuanced approach to how accents are evaluated across different crime types.