Why the voice behind the message changes how we perceive it
iStock illustration
In a global economy where talent crosses borders as easily as data, a voice can still shape how an idea is received.
Reihane Boghrati, an assistant professor in the Department of Information Systems at Arizona State University’s W. P. Carey School of Business, studies how machine learning and natural language processing intersect with business decisions. Her latest research turns that analytical lens toward something deeply human: perceived accents.
She recently co-authoredBoghrati’s other co-authors include Aliah Zewail, Amir Sepehri and Mohammad Atari. a research paper titled "Public Speakers with Nonnative Accents Garner Less Engagement,” which examines how audiences respond to identical messages delivered in different accents.
At first glance, the difference may seem minor, a matter of personal preference or familiarity. But the research suggests the forces at work are more systematic.
From classrooms and corporate meetings to global platforms such as TED Talks, accents can quietly shape whose ideas gain traction and whose fade into the background. In environments that prize innovation and leadership, those small shifts in attention can have outsized consequences.
Here, Boghrati explains the psychology behind accent bias, how it plays out in everyday settings and what organizations can do to ensure that ideas are judged on their substance rather than the familiarity of the voice delivering them.
Question: Your research shows that speakers with non-native accents receive less engagement — even when delivering identical content. If the message is the same, why does the accent make such a difference? What psychological or social factors are at play?
Answer: Our research points to two mechanisms. The first is processing fluency: Non-native-accented speech requires slightly more cognitive effort to follow, even when the listener understands every word. That extra mental load makes the experience feel less smooth, and decades of psychology research tell us that people equate ease of processing with quality and truthfulness. So a talk that’s a bit harder to follow feels less compelling without the listener realizing why.
The second mechanism is stereotyping. Accents are powerful social cues. The moment a listener detects a non-native accent, it can activate associations about the speaker’s social group, particularly around warmth and trustworthiness. In our experiments, the same speaker delivering the same content was rated as less warm and less friendly when using a Persian accent than when using an American accent. That perception of coldness, in turn, made listeners less inclined to engage with or share the talk.
The key insight is that neither of these processes feels like bias to the listener. People aren’t deliberately discounting ideas; they’re following a psychological routine that subtly shifts their attention and interest.
Q: You describe this as a subtle but powerful bias. How does accent bias show up in everyday settings like classrooms, meetings or public forums?
A: Accent bias is unusual because it operates in plain sight yet often goes unrecognized. In classrooms, students may rate an instructor with a non-native accent as less clear or less knowledgeable, even when evaluations of actual teaching quality show no difference. In meetings, a team member with a strong accent may find that their suggestions gain less traction; not because the ideas are weaker, but because colleagues process them with slightly more effort and slightly less openness. In public forums and on digital platforms, the bias scales up: Our analysis of more than 5,000 TED Talks showed that speakers with stronger non-native accents received meaningfully fewer views and likes, even after we controlled for speaker fame, topic, race, gender, sentiment and other vocal characteristics.
Q: What are the broader consequences of this kind of bias for innovation, leadership and whose ideas ultimately shape decisions?
A: The consequences are significant because in a knowledge economy, attention is important. When an accent systematically reduces the engagement with someone’s ideas, it doesn’t just affect that individual speaker; it also distorts which ideas circulate and gain influence. Consider that non-native English speakers are the majority in many global organizations and industries. If their contributions are consistently underweighted, not because the ideas are weaker but because the delivery triggers subtle cognitive and social penalties, organizations are effectively filtering out a large share of the ideas.
For leadership, the implications are also concerning. People who are listened to, shared with and cited tend to advance. If accent bias quietly reduces a person’s visibility, it can shape promotion pipelines and determine whose expertise is recognized. Over time, that means the people shaping strategy and decisions may not represent the full range of insight available to the organization.
Q: While there’s no quick fix, what practical steps can organizations take to ensure ideas are evaluated fairly, regardless of how they’re delivered?
A: Several practical steps can help here. First, organizations can reduce reliance on real-time verbal delivery as the primary way ideas are evaluated. Circulating written materials or proposals in advance of meetings allows people to engage with the substance before accent enters the picture. Second, using anonymized or written review processes for ideas can help separate the quality of the concept from the speaker's characteristics.
Third, even small procedural changes can help. When a meeting chair or designated facilitator briefly summarizes each person’s contribution in their own voice, ideas are re-presented through a standard delivery, removing cues tied to accent. Platforms like TED could feature non-native-accented speakers more prominently or provide high-quality subtitles and real-time translation tools to ease processing demands.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, simply raising awareness helps. Research in social psychology has shown that informing people about their biases can gradually shift attitudes and behavior. Most people don’t want to discount good ideas; they don’t realize they’re doing it. Making accent bias visible, much the way organizations have done with gender and racial prejudice, is a critical first step toward ensuring that the best ideas get heard, not just the most familiar-sounding ones.
More Business and entrepreneurship
Small Business Summit brings West Valley leaders, students together to build a shared economic future
More than 100 small-business founders, city leaders, faculty and students gathered at Arizona State University’s West Valley campus last week for a powerful reminder: Thriving local economies are…
Inside the Winter Olympics: ASU students experience the gold standard of sports marketing in Milan
When Daniel McIntosh talks about the Olympic Games, he does not start with medals or podiums. He starts with planning, branding and experience.“This is a sports business trip where the classroom…
ASU student team builds affordable prosthetics for pediatric use
Often, it’s the smallest among us who get overlooked. The first safety-focused car seats weren’t developed until the 1960s, and it wasn’t until later that decade that child-resistant pill bottles…