Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Women’s self-perceived health and attractiveness predict their male vocal masculinity preferences in different directions across short- and long-term relationship contexts

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research has revealed that women’s self-perceived attractiveness positively predicts preferences for male facial and vocal masculinity, particularly in the context of long-term relationships. Other research has demonstrated that women who perceive themselves to be less healthy prefer male masculinity more than do women who may be healthier. As self-perceived health may predict self-perceived attractiveness, previous findings may appear to be contradictory. Therefore, we compared the effects of self-perceived attractiveness and self-perceived health on vocal masculinity preferences in long- and short-term relationship contexts. We found that although self-perceived health and attractiveness were positively correlated, self-rated attractiveness positively predicted long-term vocal masculinity preferences, whereas self-rated health negatively predicted short-term vocal masculinity preferences. While health and attractiveness may share a common basis, here we show independent potentially adaptive relationships with preferences based on relationship context. Such preferences are potentially adaptive as (a) masculine men may pass on inheritable immunity to infection to their offspring, which may be a relatively greater benefit for women in poor health; and (b) masculine men may be more likely to invest in relationships and offspring of relatively attractive women, decreasing the cost of choosing a masculine long-term partner for attractive women. These data resolve a potential conflict between health and attractiveness influences on the attractiveness of masculinity and highlight sophisticated individual differences in preferences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apicella CL, Feinberg DR, Marlowe FW (2007) Voice pitch predicts reproductive success in male hunter-gatherers. Biol Lett 3:682–684

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma P, Weenink D (2010) Praat: doing phonetics by computer. Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/

  • Buss DM, Schmitt DP (1993) Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychol Rev 100:204–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CCG, Parker CR (2004) Adrenal androgens and the immune system. Semin Reprod Med 22:369–377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Childers DG, Wu K (1991) Gender recognition from speech: 2. Fine analysis. J Acoust Soc Am 90:1841–1856

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Collins S (2000) Men’s voices and women’s choices. Anim Behav 60:773–780

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dabbs JM, Mallinger A (1999) High testosterone levels predict low voice pitch among men. Pers Indiv Differ 27:801–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM, Little AC (2010a) The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 277:2405–2410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM (2011) Further evidence for regional variation in masculinity preferences. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 278(1707):813–814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Tybur JM, Lieberman D, Griskevicius V (2010b) Women’s preferences for masculinity in male faces are predicted by pathogen disgust, but not by moral or sexual disgust. Evol Hum Behav 31:69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans S, Neave N, Wakelin D (2006) Relationships between vocal characteristics and body size and shape in human males: an evolutionary explanation for a deep male voice. Biol Psychol 72:160–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans S, Neave N, Wakelin D, Hamilton C (2008) The relationship between testosterone and vocal frequencies in human males. Physiol Behav 93:783–788

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbanks G (1960) Voice and articulation drillbook. Harper, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg DR (2004) Fundamental frequency perturbation indicates perceived health and age in male and female speakers. J Acoust Soc Am 115:2609

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg DR (2008) Are human faces and voices ornaments signaling common underlying cues to mate value? Evol Anthropol 17:112–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg DR, DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC (2008) Correlated preferences for men’s facial and vocal masculinity. Evol Hum Behav 29:233–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Law-Smith MJ, Moore FR, DeBruine LM, Cornwell RE, Hillier SG, Perrett DI (2006) Menstrual cycle, trait estrogen level, and masculinity preferences in the human voice. Horm Behav 49:215–222

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Little AC, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2005) Manipulations of fundamental and formant frequencies influence the attractiveness of human male voices. Anim Behav 69:561–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch WT, Giedd J (1999) Morphology and development of the human vocal tract: a study using magnetic resonance imaging. J Acoust Soc Am 106:1511–1522

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch WT (2000) The evolution of speech: a comparative review. Trends Cogn Sci 4:258–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch WT, Reby D (2001) The descended larynx is not uniquely human. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 268:1669–1675

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Folstad I, Karter AJ (1992) Parasites, bright males and the immunocompetence handicap. Am Nat 139:603–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraccaro P, Feinberg D, DeBruine L, Little A, Watkins C, Jones B (2010) Correlated male preferences for femininity in female faces and voices. Evol Psychol 8:447–461

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray PB (2003) Marriage, parenting, and testosterone variation among Kenyan Swahili men. Am J Phys Anthropol 122:279–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gray PB, Chapman JF, Burnham TC, McIntyre MH, Lipson SF, Ellison PT (2004) Human male pair bonding and testosterone. Hum Nat Int Bios 15:119–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray PB, Kahlenberg SM, Barrett ES, Lipson SF, Ellison PT (2002) Marriage and fatherhood are associated with lower testosterone in males. Evol Hum Behav 23:193–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones B, Feinberg D, DeBruine L, Little A, Vukovic J (2010) A domain-specific opposite-sex bias in human preferences for manipulated voice pitch. Anim Behav 79:57–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones BC, Little AC, Penton-Voak IS, Tiddeman BP, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2001) Facial symmetry and judgements of apparent health: Support for a ‘good genes’ explanation of the attractiveness-symmetry relationship. Evol Hum Behav 22:417–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones BC, Perrett DI, Little AC, Boothroyd L, Cornwell RE, Feinberg DR, Tiddeman BP, Whiten S, Pitman RM, Hillier SG, Burt DM, Stirrat MR, Law Smith MJ, Moore FR (2005) Menstrual cycle, pregnancy and oral contraceptive use alter attraction to apparent health in faces. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 272:347–354

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li NP, Kenrick DT (2006) Sex similarities and differences inpreferences for short-term mates: what, whether, and why. J Pers Soc Psychol 90:468–489

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li NP, Valentine KA, Patel L (2011) Mate preferences in the US and Singapore: a cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. Pers Indiv Differ 50:291–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Burt DM, Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI (2001) Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 268:39–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2011a) Exposure to visual cues of pathogen contagion changes preferences for macsulinity and symmetry in opposite-sex faces. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 278:2032–2039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Connely J, Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Roberts SC (2011b) Human preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and smell. Behav Ecol 22(4):862–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Jones BC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2002) Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proc Biol Sci 269:1095–1100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Jones BC, Waitt C, Tiddeman BP, Feinberg DR, Perrett DI, Apicella CL, Marlowe FW (2008) Symmetry is related to sexual dimorphism in faces: data across culture and species. PLoS One 3:e2106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little AC, Mannion H (2006) Viewing attractive or unattractive same-sex individuals changes self-rated attractiveness and face preferences in women. Anim Behav 72:981–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak IS, Little AC, Jones BC, Burt DM, Tiddeman BP, Perrett DI (2003) Female condition influences preferences for sexual dimorphism in faces of male humans (Homo sapiens). J Comp Psychol 117:264–271

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Puts DA (2005) Mating context and menstrual phase affect women’s preferences for male voice pitch. Evol Hum Behav 26:388–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puts DA, Apicella CL, Cardenas RA (2011) Masculine voices signal men’s threat potential in foraging and industrial societies. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.03.003

  • Rendall D, Vokey JR, Nemeth C (2007) Lifting the curtain on the Wizard of Oz: Biased voice-based impressions of speaker size. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 33:1208–1219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes G, Chan J, Zebrowitz LA, Simmons LW (2003) Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health? Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 270(suppl 1):S93–S95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roney JR, Hanson KN, Durante KM, Maestripieri D (2006) Reading men’s faces: women’s mate attractiveness judgments track men’s testosterone and interest in infants. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 273:2169–2175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxton TK, Caryl PG, Craig Roberts S (2006) Vocal and facial attractiveness judgments of children, adolescents and adults: the ontogeny of mate choice. Ethology 112:1179–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheib JE (2001) Context-specific mate choice criteria: women’s trade-offs in the context of long-term and extra-pair mateships. Pers Relationship 8:371–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titze IR (1994) Principles of voice production. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (2006) Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evol Hum Behav 27:131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traunmüller H (1990) Analytical expressions for the tonotopic sensory scale. J Acoust Soc Am 88:97–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dongen S, Gangestad SW (2011) Human fluctuating asymmetry in relation to health and quality: a meta-analysis. Evol Hum Behav 32:380–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vukovic J, Feinberg DR, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Welling LLM, Little AC, Smith FG (2008) Self-rated attractiveness predicts individual differences in women’s preferences for masculine men’s voices. Pers Indiv Differ 45:451–456

    Google Scholar 

  • Vukovic J, Jones B, DeBruine L, Feinberg D, Smith F, Little A,Welling L, Main J (2010) Women’s own voice pitch predicts their preferences for masculinity in men’s voices. Behav Ecol 21:767–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi A (1975) Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. J Theor Biol 53:205–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by grants awarded to David R. Feinberg by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Canada Foundation for Innovation, and The Ministry of Research and Innovation of Ontario. All protocols for this study were approved and conducted in accordance with the McMaster Research Ethics Board. The authors declare no conflicts of interest with funding bodies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, McMaster University, 1280 Main St West, Hamilton, ON, Canada, L8S 4K1

    D. R. Feinberg, J. J. M. O’Connor & C. C. Tigue

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK

    L. M. DeBruine & B. C. Jones

  3. School of Natural Sciences, Stirling University, Stirling, Scotland, UK

    A. C. Little

Authors
  1. D. R. Feinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. M. DeBruine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. C. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. C. Little
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. J. M. O’Connor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. C. Tigue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. R. Feinberg.

Additional information

Communicated by T. Bakker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Feinberg, D.R., DeBruine, L.M., Jones, B.C. et al. Women’s self-perceived health and attractiveness predict their male vocal masculinity preferences in different directions across short- and long-term relationship contexts. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66, 413–418 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1287-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1287-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation