Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Social dialect and men’s voice pitch influence women’s mate preferences
(Generate TOC and links [bot]) |
|||
| Line 3,540: | Line 3,540: | ||
===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: normal;" id="Social_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences">Social dialect and men’s voice pitch influence women’s mate preferences</span>=== | ===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.2; font-weight: normal;" id="Social_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences">Social dialect and men’s voice pitch influence women’s mate preferences</span>=== | ||
<div class="navbar" style="padding-left: 4px; margin-top: 3px; background: #EAEAEA; color: #555; border-top: 2px solid #444; border-bottom: 1px solid #444; font-size: 13px">[[#Social_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences|permalink]] | [[#tocVoice|category: Voice]] | [[#tocSocial_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences|table of contents]]</div> | <div class="navbar" style="padding-left: 4px; margin-top: 3px; background: #EAEAEA; color: #555; border-top: 2px solid #444; border-bottom: 1px solid #444; font-size: 13px">[[#Social_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences|permalink]] | [[#tocVoice|category: Voice]] | [[#tocSocial_dialect_and_men.E2.80.99s_voice_pitch_influence_women.E2.80.99s_mate_preferences|table of contents]]</div> | ||
O’Connor et al. (2014) examined if male voice pitch and social dialect influence women's perceptions of men's socioeconomic status and attractiveness. They found women perceived lower pitched male voices as higher in socioeconomic status than higher pitched male voices. Furthermore, women independently perceived lower pitched voices and higher status sociolinguistic dialects as higher in socioeconomic status and attractiveness. They also found a significant interaction wherein women preferred lower pitched men's voices more often when dialects were lower in sociolinguistic status than when they were higher in sociolinguistic status. Women also perceived lower pitched voices as higher in socioeconomic status more often when dialects were higher in sociolinguistic status than when lower in sociolinguistic status. Finally, women's own self-rated socioeconomic status was positively related to their preferences for voices with higher status sociolinguistic dialects, but not to their preferences for voice pitch. Hence, women's preferences for traits associated with potentially biologically heritable benefits, such as low voice pitch, are moderated by the presence of traits associated with resource accrual, such as social dialect markers. However, women's preferences for language markers of resource accrual may be functionally independent from preferences for potential biological indicators of heritable benefits, such as voice pitch. | O’Connor et al. (2014) examined if male voice pitch and social dialect influence women's perceptions of men's socioeconomic status and attractiveness. They found women perceived lower pitched male voices as higher in socioeconomic status than higher pitched male voices. Furthermore, women independently perceived lower pitched voices and higher status sociolinguistic dialects as higher in socioeconomic status and attractiveness. They also found a significant interaction wherein women preferred lower pitched men's voices more often when dialects were lower in sociolinguistic status than when they were higher in sociolinguistic status. Women also perceived lower pitched voices as higher in socioeconomic status more often when dialects were higher in sociolinguistic status than when lower in sociolinguistic status. Finally, women's own self-rated socioeconomic status was positively related to their preferences for voices with higher status sociolinguistic dialects, but not to their preferences for voice pitch. Hence, women's preferences for traits associated with potentially biologically heritable benefits, such as low voice pitch, are moderated by the presence of traits associated with resource accrual, such as social dialect markers. However, women's preferences for language markers of resource accrual may be functionally independent from preferences for potential biological indicators of heritable benefits, such as voice pitch. | ||