In the run-up to the 2016 election, our living rooms were filled with
the voices of politicians arguing, debating, and pleading for votes.
But of all these voices, one received far more attention than the rest:
Hillary Clinton’s.
Nicknamed “Shrillary,” Hillary was criticized for having a voice that
was unappealing, shrill and too high-pitched. Former RNC chair Michael
Steele complained she was “going up every octave with every word.”
Comedian Howard Stern even created a commercial for an imaginary app
that lowered Hillary’s voice to a deeper, more seductive tone.
Setting aside the issue of sexism in the debate over Hillary’s voice (After all, some said Bernie Sanders’ voice sounds like the old Ant and the Aardvark cartoon,
but no one seemed to care), what it reveals is how important vocal
pitch is in choosing a leader. Sure, we like to think that we pick our
presidents based on their qualifications and policies, but let’s face
it. Little things like physical attractiveness, clothing, and yes, voice
pitch, really do matter.
But why?
What is it about a candidate’s voice that makes us swoon? Are we really that attuned to something that superficial?
A bunch of studies,
conducted both in the lab and on real-world election data, shows that
we are more likely to vote for political candidates who have deeper
voices. But this isn’t just because we want to hear the State of the
Union address delivered with the sultry tone of Morgan Freeman. It’s
because we use voice pitch to infer other qualities
that we are looking for in a world leader. A deep voice implies
strength, dominance, and masculinity. Men with deep voices have higher testosterone and higher testosterone is associated with greater assertiveness
and virility. So when we hear a male candidate with a deep voice, we
assume he holds these qualities. This is why, over and over, research
shows that male candidates with deep voices are judged to be more
competent and in turn receive more votes.
But what about a female candidate? Well, that’s where things get a
bit tricky. Women naturally have higher-pitched voices than men. So
whereas a low-pitched voice is a sign of masculinity, a high-pitched
voice is a sign of femininity. But here’s the catch—politics
is still perceived to be a masculine sport. We want leaders who exude
strength and toughness. This means that when it comes to politics, even
women are expected to have deep voices. In fact, most of the research
shows that having a deep voice is even more important for female
candidates than male candidates, precisely because it is one of the few
physical cues a woman can utilize to make herself appear more masculine.
No wonder why Margaret Thatcher purposely dropped the register of her
voice during her term as British Prime Minister.
But maybe we’re jumping the gun here. Maybe deep voices do actually convey better leadership
abilities. People with deep voices do have higher testosterone so it
could be that a deep voice is an accurate indication of strong
leadership abilities. Well, it turns out researchers have explored this
question too and the answer is a big, fat no. For example, one study examined the power ranking for members of U.S. Congress.
Although voters preferred the Congress members with lower voices, those
members were not found to be more effective legislators or speakers
compared to their higher-pitched comrades.
Okay, so although voice pitch is not actually indicative of
leadership ability, it still has a big influence on how we vote. The
lower the voice, the higher the votes. But here’s another important
question: Do we all get swayed by a candidate with a Barry White voice?
Or are some of us looking for a candidate that’s a bit more Barry
Manilow?
To answer this question, a team of researchers examined if Republicans and Democrats differ in their vocal preferences.
First, they had a group of registered voters listen to a five pairs of
voices. Half listened to pairs of female voices. The other half listened
to pairs of male voices. For each pair, one voice was higher in tone
and one was lower. After hearing the two pairs, the respondents just had
to decide which of the two they would vote for.
Importantly, in every case the voice spoke the identical politically
neutral statement (check out the audio clip below to hear some
examples). No other information was given, so all the voters could go on
was the quality of the voice.
So what did they find?
When it came to judging the male candidate, Republicans voted more
for the candidate with the deeper voice (see graph below). They want
their leaders to sound strong and dominant. This makes some sense, given
that prior research indicates Republicans are more attuned to threats
and more focused on political policies that ensure safety and security.
Instead, Democrats showed no voting preference at all between the two
types of voices.
This is probably because liberals place less emphasis
on safety and strength and more emphasis on other qualities like
equality and diplomacy.
And what about female political candidates? Do we see the same pattern?
Actually, no. When it comes to female politicians, here is one place
where conservatives and liberals agree (Wow—almost didn’t think that was
possible!). Both Republicans and Democrats were more likely to vote for
the female candidates with deeper voices.
Now when it comes to actual elections, voters have far more
information to go on than just someone’s voice. Because of that, you may
think that voice pitch has little impact on real-world voting, but
you’d be wrong. Although the influence of voice pitch is certainly
weaker in real elections than in lab studies, there is still a noteworthy impact. So even though it isn’t the only piece of information voters use to cast their vote, it is one important piece.
This is all something candidates (and voters) should keep in mind as
we lead into the 2018 mid-term elections. As much as we don’t want to
admit it, vocal tone matters. If candidates (especially those that are
Republican or female) want to be perceived as competent, they may want
to practice their Barry White impersonation.
AUTHOR
Melissa Burkley, Ph.D., is a psychologist and author of both fiction and non-fiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment