| Peer-Reviewed

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

Received: 16 February 2022     Accepted: 18 March 2022     Published: 28 April 2022
Views:       Downloads:
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), 2022. 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 17th 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
  • 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
  • Verified AB, Stockholm, Sweden

  • Verified AB, Stockholm, Sweden

  • Sections