Adding voice to transcripts leads to more extreme judgments of eye-witness statements on rebuilding psychology in Germany after World War II

Abstract Work with interviews has become widespread in recent decades, and modern technologies provide the choice between using only the transcript for further evaluation or additionally taking advantage of the audio track. Given that voice can carry extra information not contained in the text, this might lead to differences in judging the content of the text elements. We experimentally compared the evaluation of statements made by contemporary witnesses from the postwar period about the development of psychology in Germany. Fifty-four subjects rated whether the 26 quotations expressed either continuity in psychology after the war or rather a new beginning on a Likert scale. We experimentally varied whether or not the witnesses’ voices were added to the transcripts. On average, quotes with vs. without voice led to similar judgments. However, individual ratings in the condition with voice added tended to be more extreme. These results are relevant for future projects combining written and audio material.