Using body language, for example by taking more space, can be one of the most obvious and visible ways to impose ourselves. But speech also conveys status, not only in its content, but also in the characteristics of our voice. One observed that we adjust the tone of voice depending on who we are speaking to. The group of researchers from the University of Stirling (Scotland) found that the direction of this unconscious vocal tuning depends on the sender’s own perception of their status compared to that of the person listening to them.
Juan David Leongómez and his colleagues recorded students as they participated in a simulated job interview for the position of administrative assistant with three different male employers (the order of the interviews varied between participants). A photo and description of each employer showed that one was highly dominant (head of security at a prison, described as tough and intimidating), another very prestigious (Head of Department at a Business School, described as highly respected and competent), and the other last neutral (from the HR department of a high school, described as an average boss).
Participants had to introduce themselves to the employer and explain why they were perfect for the job. They were also asked how they would act if they had to talk to their boss because of a problem with a co-worker. After the interviews, participants filled out a questionnaire about their prestige and dominance and that of their employer.
Using the recordings, the researchers calculated the “fundamental frequency” of the participants’ voices (an objective measure of pitch) and identified variations in voice pitch as they spoke. A low fundamental frequency would equate to sounding calm and controlled and has been found to be perceived as more dominant for both men and women, although the natural difference in absolute pitch between the sexes was taken into account.
When talking to employers who were very dominant and prestigious, students of both sexes who also perceived themselves as dominant lowered their tones of voice, while students who perceived themselves as less dominant did the opposite. These changes in tone were most noticeable when students explained why they were the best candidates and talked about how they would resolve the conflict.
If you value articles like this, consider supporting us by becoming a Pro subscriber. Subscribers enjoy access to members-only articles, materials, and webinars.
These new findings add to others indicating that a low tone of voice communicates rashes related to social status, including physical strength and attractiveness.
It appears that students’ perception of their own status led them to use different vocal strategies in interviews with high-status employers. Students with a high self-perception of their dominance might have felt more confident and in control of the situation, and therefore more able to compete for work. In contrast, for those who rated themselves as less dominant, and probably felt more intimidated, appearing important to the employer may have been a beneficial strategy.
Limitations
However, the employers were actually computerized faces created to appear prestigious, dominant, or none of the above, so it is not known exactly how the results would relate to a prestigious person in real life, or to a less formal social situation. Simulated job interviews have been shown to increase anxiety, and recording them may have increased participants’ stress, causing voice alterations to be more or less pronounced than usual.
The implications of the effect in real life are also unknown, since it was not evaluated which group would be more successful in the interview. Although being intimidated may not be very beneficial, it’s probably not a good idea to compete with your boss either. CEOs with lower pitched voices tend to run larger companies and make more money, however surgeons (who are perceived to have more dominant and possibly arrogant voices) were more likely to be sued for malpractice.
Fountain: