37. S. H. Spence, “The Relationship Between Social-Cognitive Skills and Peer Sociometric Status,” British Journal of Developmental Psychology 5 (1987): 347–56.
38. M. A. Bayes, “Behavioral Cues of Interpersonal Warmth,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 39, no. 2 (1972): 333–39.
39. J. K. Burgoon et al., “Nonverbal Behaviors, Persuasion, and Credibility,” Human Communication Research 17 (Fall 1990): 140–69.
40. A. Mehrabian and M. Williams, “Nonverbal Concomitants of Perceived and Intended Persuasiveness,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 13, no. 1 (1969): 37–58.
41. Starkey Duncan Jr., “Nonverbal Communication,” Psychological Bulletin 77, no. 2 (1969): 118–37.
42. Harald G. Wallbott, “Bodily Expression of Emotion,” European Journal of Social Psychology 28 (1998): 879–96; Lynn A. Streeter et al., “Pitch Changes During Attempted Deception,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35, no. 5 (1977): 345–50; Allan Pease and Barbara Pease, The Definitive Book of Body Language (New York: Bantam, 2004); Bella M. DePaulo, “Nonverbal Behavior and Self Presentation,” Psychological Bulletin 11, no. 2 (1992): 203–43; Judith A. Hall et al., “Nonverbal Behavior and the Vertical Dimension of Social Relations: A Meta-analysis,” Psychological Bulletin 131, no. 6 (2005): 898–924; and Kate Fox, SIRC Guide to Flirting: What Social Science Can Tell You About Flirting and How to Do It, published online by the Social Issues Research Centre, http://www.sirc.org/index.html.
6. JUDGING PEOPLE BY THEIR COVERS
1. Grace Freed-Brown and David J. White, “Acoustic Mate Copying: Female Cowbirds Attend to Other Females’ Vocalizations to Modify Their Song Preferences,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 276 (2009): 3319–25.
2. Ibid.
3. C. Nass et al., “Computers Are Social Actors,” Proceedings of the ACM CHI 94 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference (Reading, MA: Association for Computing Machinery Press, 1994), 72–77; C. Nass et al., “Are Computers Gender Neutral?” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27, no. 10 (1997): 864–76; and C. Nass and K. M. Lee, “Does Computer-Generated Speech Manifest Personality? An Experimental Test of Similarity-Attraction,” CHI Letters 2, no. 1 (April 2000): 329–36.
4. When we speak with someone we surely react to the content of their speech. But we also react, both consciously and unconsciously, to nonverbal qualities of the person that delivers it. By removing that person from the interaction, Nass and his colleagues focused on their subjects’ automatic reaction to the human voice. But maybe that’s not what was happening. Maybe the subjects were really responding to the physical box, the machine, and not the voice. There is no way, through pure logic, to know which it was, since both choices are equally inappropriate. So the researchers performed another experiment, in which they mixed things up. Some of the students in these experiments made their evaluations on computers that were not the machines that had tutored them but had the same voice. Others made their evaluations on the same computer that had taught them but had a different voice for the evaluation phase. The results showed that it was indeed the voice that the students were responding to, and not the physical machine.
5. Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass, The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 24.
6. Sarah A. Collins, “Men’s Voices and Women’s Choices,” Animal Behavior 60 (2000): 773–80.
7. David Andrew Puts et al., “Dominance and the Evolution of Sexual Dimorphism in Human Voice Pitch,” Evolution and Human Behavior 27 (2006): 283–96.
8. David Andrew Puts, “Mating Context and Menstrual Phase Affect Women’s Preferences for Male Voice Pitch,” Evolution and Human Behavior 26 (2005): 388–97.
9. R. Nathan Pepitone et al., “Women’s Voice Attractiveness Varies Across the Menstrual Cycle,” Evolution and Human Behavior 29, no. 4 (2008): 268–74.
10. Collins, “Men’s Voices and Women’s Choices.” Larger species produce lower-pitched vocalizations than smaller ones, but within a (mammal) species, that is not the case. Recently, however, a number of studies have indicated that the timbre or higher-frequency harmonics called the formant might be a more reliable indicator, at least of height. See Drew Rendall et al., “Lifting the Curtain on the Wizard of Oz: Biased Voice-Based Impressions of Speaker Size,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 33, no. 5 (2007): 1208–19.
11. L. Bruckert et al., “Women Use Voice Parameters to Assess Men’s Characteristics,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 273 (2006): 83–89.
12. C. L. Apicella et al., “Voice Pitch Predicts Reproductive Success in Male Hunter-Gatherers,” Biology Letters 3 (2007): 682–84.
13. Klaus R. Scherer et al., “Minimal Cues in the Vocal Communication of Affect: Judging Emotions from Content-Masked Speech,” Journal of Paralinguistic Research 1, no. 3 (1972): 269–85.
14. William Apple et al., “Effects of Speech Rate on Personal Attributions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37, no. 5 (1979): 715–27.
15. Carl E. Williams and Kenneth N. Stevens, “Emotions and Speech: Some Acoustical Correlates,” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 52, no. 4, part 2 (1972): 1238–50, and Scherer et al., “Minimal Cues in the Vocal Communication of Affect.”
16. Sally Feldman, “Speak Up,” New Humanist 123, no. 5 (September–October, 2008).
17. N. Guéguen, “Courtship Compliance: The Effect of Touch on Women’s Behavior,” Social Influence 2, no. 2 (2007): 81–97.
18. M. Lynn et al., “Reach Out and Touch Your Customers,” Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Quarterly 39, no. 3 (June 1998): 60–65; J. Hornik, “Tactile Stimulation and Consumer Response,” Journal of Consumer Research 19 (December 1992): 449–58; N. Guéguen and C. Jacob, “The Effect of Touch on Tipping: An Evaluation in a French Bar,” Hospitality Management 24 (2005): 295–99; N. Guéguen, “The Effect of Touch on Compliance with a Restaurant’s Employee Suggestion,” Hospitality Management 26 (2007): 1019–23; N. Guéguen, “Nonverbal Encouragement of Participation in a Course: The Effect of Touching,” Social Psychology of Education 7, no. 1 (2003): 89–98; J. Hornik and S. Ellis, “Strategies to Secure Compliance for a Mall Intercept Interview,” Public Opinion Quarterly 52 (1988): 539–51; N. Guéguen and J. Fischer-Lokou, “Tactile Contact and Spontaneous Help: An Evaluation in a Natural Setting,” The Journal of Social Psychology 143, no. 6 (2003): 785–87.
19. C. Silverthorne et al., “The Effects of Tactile Stimulation on Visual Experience,” Journal of Social Psychology 122 (1972): 153–54; M. Patterson et al., “Touch, Compliance, and Interpersonal Affect,” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 10 (1986): 41–50; and N. Guéguen, “Touch, Awareness of Touch, and Compliance with a Request,” Perceptual and Motor Skills 95 (2002): 355–60.