Voices Considered Attractive Send Body Cues

Volunteer listeners expressed preferences for voice qualities that ordinarily correlate with specific body dimensions. Sophie Bushwick 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!

What makes someone sound sexy? To get a scientific viewpoint, researchers gauged volunteers' responses to different voices. The conclusion: voices considered attractive send messages about body size. The work is in the journal PLoS ONE. [Yi Xu et al., Human Vocal Attractiveness as Signaled by Body Size Projection]

In the animal kingdom, sound indicates size and intentions. For example, a rough and low-frequency call suggests the vocalizer is large and aggressive, while a clearer, higher frequency signals a small, nonthreatening animal.

In the study, researchers adjusted a variety of voices to correspond with different body sizes. To do so, they synthesized completely artificial voices, and recorded sentences before varying the pitches and resonance.


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.


When volunteers listened to the sound samples, men preferred higher-pitched female voices like this one [voice clip], which suggest a smaller body size. Low-frequency male voices that signaled a large body size [voice clip], were attractive to females.

Interestingly, breathiness made both male and female voices more desirable. It certainly explains the enduring popularity of [audio of Marilyn Monroe singing to JFK].

—Sophie Bushwick

[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