Deeper-Voiced Women Have Election Advantage

In mock elections between female candidates the deeper voice carried the vast majority of the votes. Christopher Intagliata reports

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

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

You vote for politicians based on their views, right? That's how it works in theory. But other factors can sway your vote. Like a politician's voice. Because studies show that the deeper the voice, the more electable the candidate. And not just for men. Deeper voiced women have an advantage over other women, even when they're running for positions traditionally held by women, like the school board or PTA president. So says a study in the journal PLoS ONE. [Rindy C. Anderson and Casey A. Klofstad, Preference for Leaders with Masculine Voices Holds in the Case of Feminine Leadership Roles]

Researchers played undergrads recordings like this. [Women’s voices.] Then they asked the students to vote for one of them for the school board or the PTA. In each mock election, the deeper voiced woman snagged about 70 percent of the votes.

Women's voices naturally deepen with age, so the researchers say we might be biased to select older women as leaders. And previous studies have shown that women with deeper voices are seen as more competent, trustworthy and strong. Margaret Thatcher used that to her advantage—she was famously coached to deepen her voice. Other politicians might do well to follow her lead, when they make their pitch to voters.


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.


—Christopher Intagliata

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

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe