The fluency principle: Why foreign accent strength negatively biases language attitudes

ABSTRACT

Two experiments tested the prediction that heavy foreign-accented speakers are evaluated more negatively than mild foreign-accented speakers because the former are perceived as more prototypical (i.e., representative) of their respective group and their speech disrupts listeners’ processing fluency (i.e., is more difficult to process). Participants listened to a mild or heavy Punjabi- (Study 1) or Mandarin-accented (Study 2) speaker. Compared to the mild-accented speaker, the heavy-accented speaker in both studies was attributed less status (but not solidarity), was perceived as more prototypical of their respective group, disrupted listeners’ processing fluency, and elicited a more negative affective reaction. The negative effects of accent strength on status were mediated by processing fluency and sequentially by processing fluency and affect, but not by prototypicality. Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Language attitudes
• foreign accent
• accent strength
• intergroup
• processing fluency
• prototypicality
• stereotypes
• fluency principle

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the editor and the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and constructive feedback, which improved this article.

Notes

1 We also ran an alternate model, which additionally tested the indirect effect of accent strength on status sequentially via prototypicality and affect – that is, the more prototypical a speaker is perceived to be of a negatively stereotyped group, the more negative affect they may elicit, which, in turn, may negatively bias listeners’ ratings. This model also provided a good fit to the data, χ²(3) = 1.05, p = .79, RMSEA = .00, CFI = 1.00, SRMR = .02, and revealed an identical pattern of results: the indirect effects of accent strength on status via fluency (B = −.32, 95% CI: −.58, −.13) and sequentially via fluency and affect (B = −.09, 95% CI: −.22, −.02) were both significant, whereas the indirect effects via prototypicality (B = −.01, 95% CI = −.15, .11) and sequentially via prototypicality and affect (B = .003, 95% CI: −.02, .05) were not. This lends further credence to the argument that the effects of foreign accent strength on status are mediated by fluency and sequentially by fluency and affect, not by prototypicality.

2 The 18 excluded participants were approximately evenly distributed across the two experimental conditions (n_mild= 11; n_heavy= 7), χ²(1) = 0.85, p = .36.

3 We again ran an alternate model, which additionally tested the indirect effect of accent strength on status sequentially via prototypicality and affect. This model provided a worse fit to the data, χ²(3) = 8.02, p = .05, RMSEA = .10, CFI = 0.95, SRMR = .046. Nonetheless, it revealed the same pattern of results: the indirect effects of accent strength on status via fluency (B = −.27, 95% CI = −.46, −.13) and sequentially via fluency and affect (B = −.03, 95% CI = −.09, −.01) were both significant, whereas the indirect effects via prototypicality (B = .06, 95% CI = −.05, .20) and sequentially via prototypicality and affect (B = .002, 95% CI = −.02, .03) were not.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by a Summer Faculty Research Fellowship from the Office of the Vice President for Research, University of Kentucky.