Linguistic Profiling

Have you ever answered the phone or called someone you are unfamiliar with, such as making an appointment for services or gotten an unsolicited phone call, heard the voice on the other end of the line, and been filled with a strong emotional response?  I want you to seriously think on your answer to that question for a moment.  Was your response to hearing that stranger’s voice a positive or a negative one?  Chances are we have all experienced these types of calls and had different emotional responses-good or bad-based simply on the sound of the voice on the other end of the line.  I have had friends work in call center positions, and they have reported how customers would react based on how they (my friends) sounded when answering the call with a simple, “Hello, this is (Name) from (company).  How can I help you?”  Everyone had the exact same script they had to use, but the way their voice sounded directed how the call would go from there, with either a happy or irate customer.  This anecdote is meant to introduce you to today’s concept that will be discussed further: linguistic profiling.  This blog post will discuss what it is, its implication, and a potential solution to this very real problem.

 

Linguistic profiling is a concept coined by John Baugh.  It is defined as the “auditory equivalent of visual racial profiling” (Baugh, Linguistic Profiling 155) in which the way someone sounds causes them to lose access to goods or services.  Linguistic profiling is a judgement made based simply on the accent someone uses, referring to how one pronounces words when verbally communicating. 

 

There are two types of linguistic profiling: preferential and discriminatory.  Preferential linguistic profiling occurs when someone’s accent is viewed in a favorable manner and they are provided normal or greater access to goods and services.  Using the above example when my friends working at the call center were viewed as having a favorable accent they were treated much more kindly by customers.  Preferential linguistic profiling can also occur among individuals who feel that they share a common accent, which is often called inclusive profiling, thereby leading to people feeling a greater affinity with those who sound like them.  Discriminatory linguistic profiling is when someone’s accent is viewed unfavorably and they are denied access to goods and services.  With the above example when my friends working the call center were identified as speaking an unfavorable accent the customer would often be far more irritated, impatient, and rude.  Discriminatory linguist profiling is typically most often used against Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPoC), but it can also affect Whites who have an unfavorable accent.  It can also be used in a way to exclude individuals from identity groups because they do not sound like the expected norm (e.g. Black individuals with foreign or dominant English accents).

 

John Baugh became interested in linguistic profiling based on his own experiences growing up as a child in Los Angeles and later in his experiences as an African American linguistic scholar.  He found that when he sounded a certain way he was provided access to goods and services, particularly if and when his physical body was not seen.  From this he conducted a series of experiments wherein he spoke specific minority accents and asked about housing availability.  He would speak with an African American/Black accent, a Latinx dialect, and then a Standard American (White) dialect, and he would ask the same question, “Hello, I am calling about the apartment to rent.  Is it still available?”  He continually received negative responses (e.g. “No, it’s no longer available”) when he spoke in both the African American/Black accent and Latinx dialect but would receive positive responses (e.g. “Yes, it is still available”) when he spoke in the Standard American (White) dialect. 

 

The implications of linguistic profiling are very profound.  Discriminatory linguistic profiling is a subtle but very real form of racism.  Because racism is strongly correlated with what someone looks like and very rarely associated with the immaterial/nonmaterial aspects of identity it is difficult to prove.  It is, however, a very real phenomenon, cited in various court cases, complaints in illegal dismissals from jobs, and denial of housing applications.  It is also not just a problem in the United States but a global issue.

 

John Baugh points out that linguistic profiling can be overcome.  By giving everyone a chance regardless of how they sound and being accepting of various accents one can begin to reduce and remove linguistic profiling.  This is easier said than done, but by being aware of the problem and one’s biases (either for or against) specific accents one can begin the individual process of reducing and removing linguistic profiling bias.  If each person who reads this post were to do that then the problem would begin to diminish and eventually disappear.

 

Bibliography

Baugh, John. "Linguistic Profiling." Makoni, Sinfree, et al. Black Linguistics: Language, Society, and Politics in Africa and the Americas. New York: Routledge, 2003. 155-168. Print.

—. TEDx Talks: The Significance of Linguistic Profiling. Atlanta, 28 June 2019. Video.

Mena, Mike. John Baugh - "Linguistic Profiling" (2003). 25 April 2020. Video.

 

 

 

 

 

The Flawed Logic of the Biology of Race: Reexamining Forensic Anthropological Biological Affinity Methods

Forensic anthropologists are vital in identifying victim profiles when typical methods, which are usually completed by a medical examiner, witness, or law enforcement officer, cannot be utilized.  Forensic anthropologists are responsible for various aspects of a victim’s identity based on their skeletal remains in order to identify who they were so justice can be served and family’s reach closure.  These are very hefty responsibilities that fall upon forensic anthropologists, and it is important to know what can and cannot be done by a forensic anthropologist.  One of the victim profile requirements, specifically related to identifying a victim’s race, has recently come under necessary scrutiny, and this blog post will further explore this topic by noting the problematic nature of race analyses within the field of forensic anthropology.

 

With victim identification forensic anthropologists are responsible for identifying the sex, age-at-death, stature, and various other aspects of a victim’s biology, which includes the problematic matter of the victim’s race.  This analysis comes under several names, including biological affinity, ancestry, and population affinity, but ultimately they all meet the same requirement: applying a “race” to the victim.  This is meant to act as an additional factor in narrowing down who the victim may be.  This is particularly pertinent and necessary if and when there are multiple potential victims the deceased could be, such as in cases of mass disasters or areas where there are multiple missing persons who could be deceased. 

 

As necessary as the need for multiple identity factors is for specifically identifying who a deceased individual is the use of race as one of those components is incredibly problematic, for the reasons listed in the points below:

-First, there are no morphological characteristics that are exclusive to any one human group.  Genetically speaking all humans, regardless of “race” or “biological affinity”, are 98% similar, and there is greater variation within “racial groups” than among all humans globally.  As noted in a previous post and in the strict stance taken by the American Anthropological Association there is no biological evidence to support “races” and race is recognized as a strictly sociocultural concept.

-Second, the methods used by forensic anthropologists to identify “race” are falsely believed to be heritable in nature, and they actually are not.  Furthermore, the methods used by forensic anthropologists are different from those used by skeletal biologists, bioarchaeologists, and population geneticists.  Their methods have been and are continually tested to determine their validity and acceptability, and any and all limitations are expressly noted within studies.  This is not the case in forensic anthropological reports, wherein the methods are popularized as flawless and conclusions definitive.

-Third-Part 1, racial classifications used by forensic anthropologists are limited and do not match the diverse array of “racial” groups that most societies recognize.  Therefore, the “race” assessment made by the forensic anthropologist may not match up with what the victim self-identified as or as others who knew the victim would identify. 

-This has actually happened in a case in Montana.  A deceased woman discovered almost 40 years ago was misidentified by her teeth as being of Asian descent, but in reality she was Caucasian.  This misidentification led to her case not only remaining unresolved for several decades but caused her son, who spent years looking for her, to not conclude that she was in fact his mother quite simply because she had been misidentified as Asian.

-Third-Part 2, furthermore, as reports are handed to law enforcement agents who ultimately make the victim identification they may misidentify a victim’s race at any point in the investigation, thereby delaying justice.

-In this vein there is also the issue of whether or not the criminal justice agents will conduct an adequate investigation if a victim is viewed as being of an inferior “race” or group, as well as problems with minority populations reporting missing individuals to criminal justice officials due to the history of mishandling investigations or inappropriate conduct between both parties.

-Fourth, the forensic anthropological methods continue to support flawed logic of biological determinism, which forwards and promotes racist, prejudicial, and discriminatory stereotypes and ideas about “racial” groups.

-Fifth, the forensic anthropological methods for determining “race” are based on flawed science.

 

It is of the utmost importance, particularly given the sensitive and critical role of the forensic anthropologist, that victim identification methods be as accurate and thorough as possible.  It is the argument of thoroughness that has led many forensic anthropologists to be unwilling to abandon these methods, but it is a subject that requires a great deal of scrutiny and reevaluation.  As the forensic anthropological methods related to identifying race are problematic and the “race” concept is not biologically supportable it would seem best that this measure of victim identification be abandoned.

 

References

Bethard, J. D., & DiGangi, E. A. (2020). Letter to the Editor—Moving Beyond a Lost Cause: Forensic Anthropology and Ancestry Estimates in the United States. Journal of Forensic Science, 1-2.

Murphy, H. (2021, May 13). Remains Found 36 Years Ago in Montana Are Identified. New York Times.

Welsch, R. L., Vivanco, L. A., & Fuentes, A. (2017). Anthropology: Asking Questions about Human Origins, Diversity, and Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

 

 

Anthropology & Social Work

Social work is a dynamic field that focuses on helping individual clients meet their needs.  Social workers must assess the problem(s) faced by clients and specific client needs, identify solutions available through community programs and organizations, as well as intervene as necessary on the client’s behalf without disabling their ability to help themselves.  While social work degree and continuing education programs provide future and current social workers with a variety of the tools required to effectively do their jobs anthropology is an excellent complement that can not only assist but enhance the skills and options available to social workers.  This blog post will address some of the ways that anthropology can and does aid in fostering more effective social work practice.

 

Anthropology is the study of all aspects of what it means to be human, which can be further broken down into the four respective subfields: cultural anthropology, archaeology, biological anthropology, and linguistic anthropology.  A full review of the subfields can be found here, but a quick review is as follows:

•  Cultural anthropology: the study of human societies and cultures, specifically in understanding the similarities and differences in cultural institutions (e.g. gender, race, ethnicity, economics, politics, religion, etc.)
• Archaeology: the study of past human cultures through their material remains 
• Biological anthropology: the study of human biological diversity both in the past and present, including but not limited to the study of primates, hominids, and modern populations 
• Linguistic anthropology: the study of language from an anthropological perspective, specifically understanding the history of languages and the effects of culture on language in all respects

 

Social workers work with different clients who often vary by age, gender, race, ethnicity, socioeconomic background and status, as well as cultural backgrounds, so it is easy to recognize the connections between cultural anthropology and social work.  Cultural anthropological knowledge enables a social worker to better understand the cultural foundations of human behavior, providing insights into the choices made by clients and why those choices over others were and are made.  This relates back to how culture is learned and provides individuals foundations for normal as well as appropriate versus inappropriate behavior.  For example, cultural groups have different ideas of what is appropriate to wear for certain situations, meaning a social worker has to be aware of how their client may interpret appropriate work wear versus casual wear.  This is important when aiding a client in selecting clothing to wear for a job interview, a court appearance, etc.  Another example is when individuals come from specific social environments, be it abusive homes or war torn environments, they may not easily trust others or know how to approach individuals for help, which is something a social worker must be keenly aware of in order to best assist their clients.

 

Additionally, cultural anthropology provides foundational background to understand culturally diverse clients, allowing for great flexibility and accessibility in community outreach, working with immigrant or first generation clients, community issues, and more.  By recognizing the macro or societal level issues that clients face, particularly based on their identity (i.e. race, ethnicity, gender, age, etc.), social workers can better assess a client’s needs and solutions for them.  As Melissa Fellin, an anthropologist turned social worker, noted her anthropological background fills in various educational deficiencies that her social work education left, specifically in recognizing how culturally diverse clients (e.g. refugees, immigrants, and first generation individuals) may feel about their situation or not know how to adequately utilize community resources to help themselves. 

 

Linguistic anthropology can also aid a social worker, specifically in recognizing how language choice can be used as a barrier to aiding clients or dialect can be viewed in either superior or inferior ways.  Many social work programs already address interpersonal communication within one’s native language.  Linguistic anthropology provides a greater scope on this information by taking into consideration how other languages are spoken and the cultural meanings behind certain words.  It also further addresses identity and language (e.g. gender and/or age differences among specific language speakers). 

 

Archaeology contributes to social work practice in a couple of unique ways.  Since archaeology focuses on the human cultural past one can gain a better understanding of not only the cultural history of a specific group but also how little or greatly social problems have changed over time.  Archaeology is contributing more and more to the conversations about how to resolve various modern problems by looking at how cultural groups in the past resolved them (e.g. resolution of pandemics or urban archaeology in addressing urban issues today), and social workers could benefit from understanding archaeology for this reason.  Additionally, for client groups that social workers may not easily be able to assess archaeological survey methods are encouraged (see archaeology and homelessness). 

 

Last but not least is the intersections between biological anthropology and social work.  There are a lot of ideas out there about the naturalness of certain behaviors, and unfortunately there is a suite of poorly completed research that supports some of these ideas.  Biological anthropological studies of primates are foundational in refuting these ideas.  Additionally, the field of medical anthropology takes into account issues concerning health and culture, which can be a central issue that various social workers face.  For example, Dr. Tam Perry focuses her research in anthropology and social work, specifically in examining the changing social environments of the elderly.  Her work analyzed the work, residence, and kin transitions elderly individuals face as they age, including but not limited to situations where they are no longer able to work, have declining health, and less access to family, all of which cause them to change their lifestyles accordingly.  There are various cultural and social pressures and expectations placed on the elderly as these life changes occur, such as transitioning into a retirement home or community, retiring from the workforce, seeking greater medical care (and the financial burdens associated with that), etc.  As a social worker she is able to look at the cultural and social systems in place that affect the elderly, specifically in accessing the resources they need.

 

As discussed in this post there are several ways that anthropology can and does complement social work education and practice.  Several interdisciplinary doctoral programs have been created as a result of the complementary nature of anthropology to social work.  Anthropologists and social workers are benefiting from them.  Ultimately, any discipline that provides a greater understanding of human issues is going to work well with social work, but as anthropology takes such a holistic approach to what it means to be human it is an excellent complement for social work and any occupation.

 

Bibliography

Fellin, Melissa. ACE Advice. 2021. Electronic. 9 June 2021.

Hay, Lorna. "The contribution of social anthropology to socialwork practice." Australian Journal of Social Work, (1952): 41-53. Document.

Red Ventures Company. Social Work Degree Guide. 2021. Electronic. 9 June 2021.

Social Work and Anthropology (SWAN) Program at Wayne State University. Ph.D. in Social Work and Anthropology (SWAN). n.d. Electronic. 9 June 2021.