Washington - If results of a new study are to be believed, candidates with lower-pitched voices may get more votes in elections.
The new study by biologists and a political scientist has revealed that both men and women prefer political candidates with deeper voices.
The results also suggest that biology â not just partisanship or ideology â can shape votersâ choices.
âWe often make snap judgments about candidates without full knowledge of their policies or positions. These findings might help explain why,â said Duke University biologist Rindy Anderson.
âItâs clear that our voices carry more information than the words we speak. Knowing this can help us understand the factors that influence our social interactions and possibly why there are fewer women elected to high-level political positions,â she said.
To test votersâ preference on voice pitch, Anderson, Duke biologist Susan Peters and University of Miami political scientist Casey Klofstad recorded men and women saying, âI urge you to vote for me this November.â
The scientists then edited each recording to create a higher- and lower-pitched version of the original.
The team played the recordings of the female voices to 37 men and 46 women at the University of Miami, and the male voices to 49 men and 40 women at Duke. They found that both men and women âelectedâ the candidates with the lower-pitched voices, regardless of the speakerâs gender.
Voice pitch can also affect how people perceive a speakerâs competence, honesty and strength, according to past research. But no one had applied that connection to voters' preferences for the voices of both male and female candidates, Anderson said.
In a second experiment, Anderson and her colleagues played the same recordings to three groups of 35 men and 35 women and asked the subjects to select which candidate seemed stronger and more trustworthy and competent.
Both men and women tended to perceive lower-pitched female voices to have all three traits. But only male subjects perceived lower-pitched male voices to be stronger and more competent. They may have been tuned into pitch to gauge the speakerâs competitiveness and social aggressiveness, Anderson said.
Women, however, may not discriminate strength and competence in male voices because they are tuning into different cues, vocal or otherwise, to evaluate those traits, she said.
But the findings are based on hypothetical elections conducted in the lab, she said.
âWe need to be very careful about interpreting these results in a broader context,â Anderson said.
The findings raise the possibility that, since women tend to have higher-pitched voices than men, their voice could be one of many different factors that influence gender inequality in leadership roles, she noted.
Anderson said she and her collaborators plan to test what they have learned in the laboratory in the 2012 elections.
The results appeared in the March 14 Proceedings of the Royal Society B.