Preferences shaped by evolution draw voters to candidates with lower-pitched voices

Voters prefer to choose candidates with lower-pitched voices, according to new findings by researchers at McMaster University.

A team from the Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behavior found that study subjects were more inclined to vote for with lower-pitched voices, suggesting that perceptions developed long ago may be still be influencing the way we choose leaders.

"We're looking at men's low voice-pitch as a cue to dominance, which is related to leadership," says graduate student Cara Tigue, lead author of the paper, published on-line today in the journal . "Throughout our , it would have been important for our ancestors to pay attention to cues to good leadership, because group leaders affected a person's ability to survive and reproduce within a group. We're looking at it in a present-day, 21st-century context."

To test voice-related perceptions, the researchers manipulated archival recordings of US presidents, creating lower- and higher-pitched versions of each voice.

They played the altered recordings for and asked them to rate their perceptions of the speakers' attractiveness, leadership potential, honesty, intelligence and dominance. They also asked subjects which version of the voice they would prefer to vote for, both in peacetime and wartime.

Though the motivations were different, in all cases they preferred candidates with lower-pitched voices.

While political strategists have long taken voice-pitch into account in presenting their candidates, the premise that voters prefer men with lower-pitched voices had never been scientifically tested until now.

While voice-pitch is not the only influence on voters, the researchers say, their study shows it is clearly part of the decision-making process.

"One of the implications of our research is that voters may take it into account when making voting decisions," says Tigue.

Earlier research that looked at US between 1960 and 2000 found that in all eight elections, the candidate with the lower voice had won the popular vote.

Other studies had concluded that both men and women find lower-pitched voices more attractive.

Subjects consider men with low-pitched voices to be both more attractive and more dominant, but the new research shows that it's the of that has a greater influence on voting decisions.

"People think we want to vote for men with lower-pitched voices because they're more attractive," says David Feinberg, the McMaster psychology professor who supervised the research, "but it's because people perceive them as better leaders and more dominant, not just because they're ."

Feinberg says future projects will look at perceptions of Canadian politicians and female politicians.

Explore further

Can you predict your mate will cheat by their voice?

Citation: Preferences shaped by evolution draw voters to candidates with lower-pitched voices (2011, November 14) retrieved 24 August 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 14, 2011
How can they relate the observations made in the present back to some unknown, imagined "evolutionary" history that supposedly occurred millions of years ago?
Who was there to record that people followed or chose people with low-pitched voices as their leaders? How do they know that this was the case then?
Basically, bringing any supposed evolutionary history into the article is just pie in the sky. Completely useless.

Nov 14, 2011
It could be learned. Taller and so larger people tend to more successful (for whatever reason). Women invariably have higher pitched voices than men. As children turn into adolescents and then adults they could pick up these associations and so when tested link dominance and masculinity to low pitched voices. Evolution need not have anything to do with it. Indeed, this explanation is much more plausible since it offers a mechanism by which the association might arise while the "pop" evolution psychological one avoids suggesting any means by which inherited genes might result in this association.

Nov 14, 2011
So in theory, a candidate with an artificially enhanced ultra-manly voice would be the best President ever, right?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more