CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54Animal Vocal Communication and BehaviorEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

Vocal fundamental and formant frequencies are honest signals of threat potential in peripubertal males

Open access
Hodges-Simeon, C. R., Gurven, M., Puts, D. A., Gaulin, S. J. C.·2014·Behavioral Ecology
DOI 10.1093/beheco/aru081PMC PMC4095947
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Fundamental and formant frequencies influence perceived pitch and are sexually dimorphic in humans. The information content of these acoustic parameters can illuminate the forces of sexual selection shaping vocal sex differences as well as the mechanisms that ensure signal reliability. We use multiple regression to examine the relationships between somatic (height, adiposity, and strength) and acoustic (fundamental frequency [F0], formant position [Pf], and fundamental frequency variation [F0-SD]) characteristics in a sample of peripubertal Bolivian Tsimane. Results indicate that among males—but not females—strength is the strongest predictor of F0 and Pf and that F0 and Pf are independent predictors of strength when height and adiposity are controlled. These findings suggest that listeners may attend to vocal frequencies because they signal honest, nonredundant information about male strength and threat potential, which are strongly related to physical maturity and which cannot be ascertained from visual or other indicators of height or adiposity alone.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/beheco/aru081

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Formant frequency of an acoustic signal is produced from resonant frequencies of the vocal tract, which is constrained and scales according to body size.

    “Formant frequency of an acoustic signal, in contrast, is produced from resonant frequencies of the vocal tract, which is constrained and scales according to body size.”

    From Roars, Rumbles, and Resonance: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Crocodylian Acoustic Signals (2026) · cites this paper as Hodges‐Simeon et al. 2014

    The Introduction says vocal-tract dimensions determine formants, supporting the claim about their acoustic origin. It also says evidence that formant structure scales with overall body size is inconclusive. The Discussion reports that strength, rather than height or adiposity, predicts formant position when those measures are considered together. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Formant frequency is generally considered an honest signal of individual size, with larger individuals producing lower frequency formants than smaller individuals.

    “Thus, this parameter is more generally considered an honest signal of individual size, with larger individuals producing lower frequency formants than their smaller counterparts (Fitch and Hauser 2002; Hodges‐Simeon et al. 2014).”

    From Roars, Rumbles, and Resonance: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Crocodylian Acoustic Signals (2026) · cites this paper as Hodges‐Simeon et al. 2014

    The Discussion (page not provided) says formant position correlates with height in both sexes and describes the view that formant structure can honestly indicate height. But it finds strength, not body size, is the significant predictor when both are considered; the Introduction also calls the broader size–formant evidence inconclusive. The source therefore does not support presenting lower formants as a generally reliable signal of larger individual size. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Daly M, Wilson MI. 1983. Sex, evolution and behavior, 2nd ed. Boston (MA): Willard Grant Press. [Google Scholar]
  2. Searcy WA, Nowicki S. 2005. The evolution of animal communication: reliability and honesty in signaling systems. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hodges-Simeon, C. R., Gurven, M., Puts, D. A., & Gaulin, S. J. C.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Behavioral Ecology
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2014-05-12
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
984-988
ISSN
  • 1045-2249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-7279
DOI
10.1093/beheco/aru081
PMC
PMC4095947
OpenAlex
W2114706348
Cited by
54
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2
FWCI
7.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral Ecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
vocal fundamental frequency, formant frequencies, sexual selection, honest signaling, acoustic signals, sexual dimorphism, Tsimane, signal reliability, body height, adiposity, physical maturity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review