New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Deep Voice Gives Politicians Electoral Boost

Two new studies find that a deeper voice gives a politican an edge over a higher-pitched opponent

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

[JFK audio]

What makes a successful politician? Experience? Skill? Charisma? Perhaps you were searching for these traits while watching the recent Republican presidential debate. But what you might not have thought about was how your perception of the candidates could be influenced by their voices.  [Chris Christie audio]

In two recently published studies, researchers looked at how the pitch of a candidate’s voice affected their chances in an election. The first study found that in the 2012 U.S. House elections candidates with lower voices were more likely than a higher-pitched opponent to win. With one exception: when running against a female opponent, candidates with higher voices were more popular, especially if they were men. That study is in the journal Political Psychology [Casey Klofstad, Candidate Voice Pitch Influences Election Outcomes].


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In the second study, researchers wanted to know why a deep voice was a potent political tool

. They recorded men and women speaking the sentence “I urge you to vote for me this November.” They then altered the recordings to create higher and lower pitched versions of each sentence.

More than 800 volunteers listened to the audio. Their preference for lower-pitched voices correlated with their preconception that these individuals were older, stronger and more competent. This study is in the journal PLoS ONE [Casey Klofstad, Rindy Anderson and Stephen Nowicki, Perceptions of Competence, Strength, and Age Influence Voters to Select Leaders with Lower-Pitched Voices].

The researchers note that a preference for leaders with deeper voices may be the result of so-called “cavemen instincts.” A deep voice is associated with high testosterone, physical strength and aggression. And way back when, those qualities were probably attractive in a leader. High-pitched voices also are thought to convey negative emotions, such as stress and fear.

We like to think that we consider our electoral options carefully, and base our decisions on conscious, rational judgments. But it may be a candidate’s height, attractiveness or voice that play outsized roles when we go to the polls.

—Diana Kwon

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

[Study audio via Casey Klofstad, University of Miami]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe