G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
I feel like this study has been done many times and that it’s been reported on the blogs I read over and over. Can’t hurt to hammer home on it though.
A new study released recently by Duke University has found that candidates with lower-pitched voices may get more votes.
The study shows that both men and women prefer candidates with deeper voices.
“We often make snap judgments about candidates without full knowledge of their policies or positions,” says Duke University biologist Rindy Anderson. “These findings might help explain why.’’
“It’s clear that our voices carry more information than the words we speak,” she said. “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.’’
In discussing disparate sexual outcomes in authoritative positions – the ones that feminists are most concerned about – I’ve often thought that these essential dominance cues are overlooked. When we’re talking about why a person got a promotion or got nudged towards a certain career path or gains confidence from others, we’re talking about a series of events that depend on the subtle ways in which people are treated or responded to by others. These are fundamentally primal responses, and it’s hard to legislate them away.
All else being equal, a deeper and more authoritative presence is one of the characteristics needed to many right-tail jobs, again, the ones that feminists covet and thrash their heads against the wall to secure. Think of a job site foreman. Those guys sometimes have to “light a fire” under the crew, suppliers, or inspectors. They have to get stuff done, and this requires a myriad of motivational techniques. A deep voice or an aggressive presence carries the connotation, when we take it to its conclusion, of potential violence. We see a pattern then: women have a better chance of taking on authority roles in government because government is not dependent on these interpersonal responses as much as the private sector. The private sector still operates on these innate response mechanisms. Which is why, to bureaucrats and many politicians, the private sector is considered a jungle.