One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias

Andreea Dragu; Lars Johan Lundberg; Sven Björsten

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

| Peer-Reviewed

One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias

Andreea Dragu, Lars Johan Lundberg, Sven Björsten

Published in International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 10, Issue 2)

Received: 16 February 2022 Accepted: 18 March 2022 Published: 28 April 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Among the biases that affect the perceived credibility of plaintiffs, defendants and (expert) witnesses, there is one that plagues asylum courts in particular, as they are the ones where LAAP (Language Analysis for Asylum Procedures) is the most likely to come up: the native-speaker bias. This concerns native speakers of the asylum claimant’s language who contribute to forensic linguistic analyses of the claimant’s dialect aimed to determine whether a connection can be established between the claimant’s language use and their claimed place of origin. Their insights are prone to be dismissed by courts in favour of those of people with prestigious academic qualifications. In no way seeking to deny the value and contribution of the latter, this article sets out to show that they cannot replace the former, as certain linguistic abilities are unlikely to attain the same level of proficiency when acquired non-natively – that is, after the critical period, which ends around puberty. While the input provided by native-speaker analysts does not determine the conclusion of the language analysis by itself, it is they who provide the raw data that is subsequently processed by qualified linguists according to forensic methodology and the information available in the specialised literature. Thus, a linguist’s analysis is bound to be compromised if the primary observations that it relies on are not adequate and adequate data can most aptly be provided by native speakers. Understanding this would enable a more correct assessment of the credibility of native speakers employed in LAAP and help stamp out one of the biases that threaten the fairness of asylum court proceedings and outcomes.

Published in	International Journal of Language and Linguistics (Volume 10, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
Page(s)	163-165
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Asylum Court, Native Speaker, Language Analysis, Bias, Credibility, Forensic Linguistics, LADO, Expert Witness

References

[1]	Bussmann, H. (2006). Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. (G. Trauth, & K. Kazzazi, Ed.) Taylor and Francis e-Library.
[2]	Code of Practice. (2020). Retrieved from The International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics. Retrieved 14/03/2022, from https://www.iafpa.net/the-association/code-of-practice/
[3]	Foulkes, P., & Wilson, K. (2011). Language Analysis for the Determination of Origin: an Empirical Study. Proceedings of the 17^th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. University of Hong Kong. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d489/a80ed56005a0f70a78c3b832c05e871712b4.pdf
[4]	Good, A. (2009). Witness Statements and Credibility Assessments in the British Asylum Courts. (M. Maguire, & F. Murphy, Eds.) Irish Journal of Anthropology, 12 (3), 45-57.
[5]	Hoskin, J. (2018). Native Speaker Non-Linguists in LADO: an Insider Perspective. In I. Nick, Forensic Linguistics: Asylum-seekers, Refugees and Immigrants (pp. 23-40). Vernon Press.
[6]	Hurford, J. (1991). The Evolution of the Critical Period for Language Acquisition. Cognition, 40 (3), 159-201. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90024-X
[7]	Lev-Ari, S., & Keysar, B. (2010). Why Don't We Believe Non-native Speakers? The Influence of Accent on Credibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46 (6), 1093-1096. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.05.025
[8]	Lindholm, T. (2006). Group-Based Biases and Validity in Eyewitness Credibility Judgments: Examining Effects of Witness Ethnicity and Presentation Modality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1474-1501. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02180.x
[9]	Masthoff, K., Boubaker, Y., & Köster, O. (2010). The Tell-Tale Dialect: Analysis of Dialectal Variation of German Native Speakers in Telephone Conversations. IAFPA 2010. Trier University, Germany.
[10]	Nagle, J., Brodsky, S., & Weeter, K. (2014, 3 16). Gender, Smiling, and Witness Credibility in Actual Trials. Behavioral Sciences and the Law. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2112
[11]	Newport, E., Bavelier, D., & Neville, H. (2001). Critical Thinking about Critical Periods: Perspectives on a Critical Period for Language Acquisition. In E. Dupoux (Ed.), Language, Brain, and Cognitive Development. The MIT Press.
[12]	Patrick, P. (2008). Linguistic Human Rights: A Sociolinguistic Introduction. Retrieved 19/02/2016, from http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~patrickp/lhr/lhrasylum.htm
[13]	POST (Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. (2015, October). Unitentional Bias in Court. 512. UK.
[14]	Resolutions. (2009). Retrieved from The International Association for Forensic Phonetics and Acoustics. Retrieved 14/03/2022, from https://www.iafpa.net/about/resolutions/
[15]	Ruva, C., & Becker Bryant, J. (2006, 7 21). The Impact of Age, Speech Style, and Question Form on Perceptions of Witness Credibility and Trial Outcome. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02593.x
[16]	Scharenborg, O., & van Os, M. (2019). Why Listening in Background Noise Is Harder in a Non-Native Language than in a Native Language: A Review. In Speech Communication. doi: 10.1016/j.specom.2019.03.001.
[17]	Thomas, C. (2010). Are Juries Fair? Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/10. Retrieved from Ministry of Justice.
[18]	Wessel, E., Drevland, G., Eilertsen, D., & Magnussen, S. (2006, May). Credibility of the Emotional Witness: A Study of Ratings by Court Judges. Law and Human Behavior, 30 (2), 221-30. doi: 10.1007/s10979-006-9024-1.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Andreea Dragu, Lars Johan Lundberg, Sven Björsten. (2022). One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 10(2), 163-165. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Andreea Dragu; Lars Johan Lundberg; Sven Björsten. One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2022, 10(2), 163-165. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Andreea Dragu, Lars Johan Lundberg, Sven Björsten. One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. Int J Lang Linguist. 2022;10(2):163-165. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24,
  author = {Andreea Dragu and Lars Johan Lundberg and Sven Björsten},
  title = {One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {10},
  number = {2},
  pages = {163-165},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20221002.24},
  abstract = {Among the biases that affect the perceived credibility of plaintiffs, defendants and (expert) witnesses, there is one that plagues asylum courts in particular, as they are the ones where LAAP (Language Analysis for Asylum Procedures) is the most likely to come up: the native-speaker bias. This concerns native speakers of the asylum claimant’s language who contribute to forensic linguistic analyses of the claimant’s dialect aimed to determine whether a connection can be established between the claimant’s language use and their claimed place of origin. Their insights are prone to be dismissed by courts in favour of those of people with prestigious academic qualifications. In no way seeking to deny the value and contribution of the latter, this article sets out to show that they cannot replace the former, as certain linguistic abilities are unlikely to attain the same level of proficiency when acquired non-natively – that is, after the critical period, which ends around puberty. While the input provided by native-speaker analysts does not determine the conclusion of the language analysis by itself, it is they who provide the raw data that is subsequently processed by qualified linguists according to forensic methodology and the information available in the specialised literature. Thus, a linguist’s analysis is bound to be compromised if the primary observations that it relies on are not adequate and adequate data can most aptly be provided by native speakers. Understanding this would enable a more correct assessment of the credibility of native speakers employed in LAAP and help stamp out one of the biases that threaten the fairness of asylum court proceedings and outcomes.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias
AU  - Andreea Dragu
AU  - Lars Johan Lundberg
AU  - Sven Björsten
Y1  - 2022/04/28
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 163
EP  - 165
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
AB  - Among the biases that affect the perceived credibility of plaintiffs, defendants and (expert) witnesses, there is one that plagues asylum courts in particular, as they are the ones where LAAP (Language Analysis for Asylum Procedures) is the most likely to come up: the native-speaker bias. This concerns native speakers of the asylum claimant’s language who contribute to forensic linguistic analyses of the claimant’s dialect aimed to determine whether a connection can be established between the claimant’s language use and their claimed place of origin. Their insights are prone to be dismissed by courts in favour of those of people with prestigious academic qualifications. In no way seeking to deny the value and contribution of the latter, this article sets out to show that they cannot replace the former, as certain linguistic abilities are unlikely to attain the same level of proficiency when acquired non-natively – that is, after the critical period, which ends around puberty. While the input provided by native-speaker analysts does not determine the conclusion of the language analysis by itself, it is they who provide the raw data that is subsequently processed by qualified linguists according to forensic methodology and the information available in the specialised literature. Thus, a linguist’s analysis is bound to be compromised if the primary observations that it relies on are not adequate and adequate data can most aptly be provided by native speakers. Understanding this would enable a more correct assessment of the credibility of native speakers employed in LAAP and help stamp out one of the biases that threaten the fairness of asylum court proceedings and outcomes.
VL  - 10
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Andreea Dragu

Verified AB, Stockholm, Sweden
Lars Johan Lundberg

Verified AB, Stockholm, Sweden
Sven Björsten

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Andreea Dragu, Lars Johan Lundberg, Sven Björsten. (2022). One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 10(2), 163-165. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Andreea Dragu; Lars Johan Lundberg; Sven Björsten. One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2022, 10(2), 163-165. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Andreea Dragu, Lars Johan Lundberg, Sven Björsten. One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias. Int J Lang Linguist. 2022;10(2):163-165. doi: 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24,
  author = {Andreea Dragu and Lars Johan Lundberg and Sven Björsten},
  title = {One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias},
  journal = {International Journal of Language and Linguistics},
  volume = {10},
  number = {2},
  pages = {163-165},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijll.20221002.24},
  abstract = {Among the biases that affect the perceived credibility of plaintiffs, defendants and (expert) witnesses, there is one that plagues asylum courts in particular, as they are the ones where LAAP (Language Analysis for Asylum Procedures) is the most likely to come up: the native-speaker bias. This concerns native speakers of the asylum claimant’s language who contribute to forensic linguistic analyses of the claimant’s dialect aimed to determine whether a connection can be established between the claimant’s language use and their claimed place of origin. Their insights are prone to be dismissed by courts in favour of those of people with prestigious academic qualifications. In no way seeking to deny the value and contribution of the latter, this article sets out to show that they cannot replace the former, as certain linguistic abilities are unlikely to attain the same level of proficiency when acquired non-natively – that is, after the critical period, which ends around puberty. While the input provided by native-speaker analysts does not determine the conclusion of the language analysis by itself, it is they who provide the raw data that is subsequently processed by qualified linguists according to forensic methodology and the information available in the specialised literature. Thus, a linguist’s analysis is bound to be compromised if the primary observations that it relies on are not adequate and adequate data can most aptly be provided by native speakers. Understanding this would enable a more correct assessment of the credibility of native speakers employed in LAAP and help stamp out one of the biases that threaten the fairness of asylum court proceedings and outcomes.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - One Bias Particular to Asylum Courts: The Native-Speaker Bias
AU  - Andreea Dragu
AU  - Lars Johan Lundberg
AU  - Sven Björsten
Y1  - 2022/04/28
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
T2  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JF  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
JO  - International Journal of Language and Linguistics
SP  - 163
EP  - 165
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-0221
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20221002.24
AB  - Among the biases that affect the perceived credibility of plaintiffs, defendants and (expert) witnesses, there is one that plagues asylum courts in particular, as they are the ones where LAAP (Language Analysis for Asylum Procedures) is the most likely to come up: the native-speaker bias. This concerns native speakers of the asylum claimant’s language who contribute to forensic linguistic analyses of the claimant’s dialect aimed to determine whether a connection can be established between the claimant’s language use and their claimed place of origin. Their insights are prone to be dismissed by courts in favour of those of people with prestigious academic qualifications. In no way seeking to deny the value and contribution of the latter, this article sets out to show that they cannot replace the former, as certain linguistic abilities are unlikely to attain the same level of proficiency when acquired non-natively – that is, after the critical period, which ends around puberty. While the input provided by native-speaker analysts does not determine the conclusion of the language analysis by itself, it is they who provide the raw data that is subsequently processed by qualified linguists according to forensic methodology and the information available in the specialised literature. Thus, a linguist’s analysis is bound to be compromised if the primary observations that it relies on are not adequate and adequate data can most aptly be provided by native speakers. Understanding this would enable a more correct assessment of the credibility of native speakers employed in LAAP and help stamp out one of the biases that threaten the fairness of asylum court proceedings and outcomes.
VL  - 10
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download