Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30830931›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Human roars communicate upper-body strength more effectively than do screams or aggressive and distressed speech.

Jordan Raine, Katarzyna Pisanski, Rod Bond, Julia Simner, David Reby

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Nonlinear phenomena in vertebrate vocalizations: mechanisms and communicative functions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Emotion in Nonverbal Communication: Comparing Animal and Human Vocalizations and Human Text Messages.Emotion review : journal of the International Society for Research on Emotion · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Universal interpretations of vocal music.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Vocal Cues to Male Physical Formidability.Frontiers in psychology · 2022
    Article
  17. Predicting strength from aggressive vocalizations versus speech in African bushland and urban communities.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  18. Vocal modulation in human mating and competition.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jordan RaineMammal Vocal Communication and Cognition Research Group, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Katarzyna PisanskiMammal Vocal Communication and Cognition Research Group, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0992-2477
Rod BondMammal Vocal Communication and Cognition Research Group, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Julia SimnerMULTISENSE Research Lab, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
David RebyMammal Vocal Communication and Cognition Research Group, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite widespread evidence that nonverbal components of human speech (e.g., voice pitch) communicate information about physical attributes of vocalizers and that listeners can judge traits such as strength and body size from speech, few studies have examined the communicative functions of human nonverbal vocalizations (such as roars, screams, grunts and laughs). Critically, no previous study has yet to examine the acoustic correlates of strength in nonverbal vocalisations, including roars, nor identified reliable vocal cues to strength in human speech. In addition to being less acoustically constrained than articulated speech, agonistic nonverbal vocalizations function primarily to express motivation and emotion, such as threat, and may therefore communicate strength and body size more effectively than speech. Here, we investigated acoustic cues to strength and size in roars compared to screams and speech sentences produced in both aggressive and distress contexts. Using playback experiments, we then tested whether listeners can reliably infer a vocalizer's actual strength and height from roars, screams, and valenced speech equivalents, and which acoustic features predicted listeners' judgments. While there were no consistent acoustic cues to strength in any vocal stimuli, listeners accurately judged inter-individual differences in strength, and did so most effectively from aggressive voice stimuli (roars and aggressive speech). In addition, listeners more accurately judged strength from roars than from aggressive speech. In contrast, listeners' judgments of height were most accurate for speech stimuli. These results support the prediction that vocalizers maximize impressions of physical strength in aggressive compared to distress contexts, and that inter-individual variation in strength may only be honestly communicated in vocalizations that function to communicate threat, particularly roars. Thus, in continuity with nonhuman mammals, the acoustic structure of human aggressive roars may have been selected to communicate, and to some extent exaggerate, functional cues to physical formidability.

Indexed as

AcousticsAdultAggressionAuditory PerceptionBody SizeCuesFemaleHumansMaleMuscle StrengthNonverbal CommunicationSpeechTorsoYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30830931
PMCPMC6398857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.