Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Line 2,713: | Line 2,713: | ||
Another study by Puts (2005) recorded the vocal samples of a (N=111) males from the University of Pittsburgh and asked them to report their number of recent sexual partners. He also had (n=142) female students in various states of ovulation (conception risk) rate the attractiveness of the male voice samples, based on whether they were desired for a short or long term relationship. It was found: | Another study by Puts (2005) recorded the vocal samples of a (N=111) males from the University of Pittsburgh and asked them to report their number of recent sexual partners. He also had (n=142) female students in various states of ovulation (conception risk) rate the attractiveness of the male voice samples, based on whether they were desired for a short or long term relationship. It was found: | ||
* Lower voices were perceived as more attractive, particularly in fertile women for short-term relationships. | * Lower voices were perceived as more attractive, particularly in fertile women for short-term relationships. | ||
* The authors of the study stated low vocal pitch in males is attractive to women possibly because it denotes "good genes", benefits males in male to male competition for mates, or it simply developed due to "Fisherian | * The authors of the study stated low vocal pitch in males is attractive to women possibly because it denotes "good genes", benefits males in male to male competition for mates, or it simply developed due to "[[Fisherian runaway]] sexual selection" (i.e. the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexy_son_hypothesis Sexy Son hypothesis]) | ||
* Lower vocal pitch weakly predicted male participants’ self-reported number of sexual partners over the past year (r=.17) | * Lower vocal pitch weakly predicted male participants’ self-reported number of sexual partners over the past year (r=.17) | ||