Skip to main content

Actor James Earl Jones

Paul Hawthorne/Getty Images

Cue up the James Earl Jones: A new British study demonstrates that women not only prefer deep male voices to high pitched ones, they pay more attention to what they say.

Led by David Smith, a PhD student at the University of Aberdeen, the study showed women's memory is sensitive to men's voice pitch, which is a significant factor in mate choice because it can hint at testosterone levels and genetic quality, evolutionary psychologists suggest.

In two experiments, researchers showed 91 women images of objects and had them listen as male and female voices of various pitches described the objects. In both cases, women showed a strong preference for the low-pitched male voice, remembering objects more accurately when they had been described by that voice.

Story continues below advertisement

"Our findings demonstrate that women's memory is enhanced with lower pitch male voices, compared with the less attractive raised pitch male voices," Mr. Smith said in a release.

(Sorry Chris Rock and Gilbert Gottfried.)

"We think this is evidence that evolution has shaped women's ability to remember information associated with desirable men," his colleague Kevin Allan continued.

Findings released earlier this year by researchers at McMaster University suggest that even as women are more drawn to a deep pitch, they're also more likely to suspect rumbling-voiced men of infidelity.

"Lower-pitched men's voices are not only rated as more attractive, but are associated with a greater number of reported sexual partners, and greater reproductive success than are higher-pitched men's voices," those researchers wrote.

Maybe put on some Barry White instead?

Editor's note: David Smith was incorrectly identified in the original version of this story. This version has been corrected.

Story continues below advertisement

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

If your comment doesn't appear immediately it has been sent to a member of our moderation team for review

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading…

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.