↓ Skip to main content

Hadza Men With Lower Voice Pitch Have a Better Hunting Reputation

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Psychology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Hadza Men With Lower Voice Pitch Have a Better Hunting Reputation
Published in
Evolutionary Psychology, November 2017
DOI 10.1177/1474704917740466
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Previous research with hunter-gatherers has found that women perceive men with voices manipulated to be lower in pitch to be better hunters, and men perceive women with lower pitch to be better gatherers. Here, we test if actual voice pitch is associated with hunting and gathering reputations in men and women, respectively. We find that voice pitch does relate to foraging reputation in men, but not in women, with better hunters having a lower voice pitch. In addition, we find that the previously documented relationship between voice pitch and reproductive success no longer holds when controlling for hunting reputation, but hunting reputation remains a significant predictor of reproductive success when controlling for voice pitch. This raises the possibility that voice pitch is being selected for in hunter-gatherers because of the relationship between voice pitch and hunting reputation.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 20%
Unknown 10 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,320,172
of 32,155,846 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Psychology
#149
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,217
of 477,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Psychology
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,155,846 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 477,236 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.