I cannot count the number of things that are wrong in this research article

You recruit N=24 students. To apply for fictious low-profille secretary jobs. Over the Phone. With artificial, dominance-rated pictures. To measure whether their pitch varies.

Just to throw a couple more “so that“s into the game.
- The students probably perceived the lower voices older and raised their voice because they thought they don’t hear very well, if they speak so brabbly low, and they need to make themselves better understood.
- This explains perfectly why so many car and other salesmen suddenly speak higher-pitched to women on the phone. Surely they want to give up their position of authority. Not.
- Of course, all who not follow their systematics are opportunistic, manipulative psychopaths. Or maybe they simply mirror instead of establishing hierarchic reciprocity. Which leads us to …

… did you correct for epistemological beliefs and types with regard to hierarchies or did you particularly recruit students only and use this noob-position description to make sure the result is biased for hierarchy?

Predicate: Not generalizable.

Source: University of Stirling “Social Status of Listener Alters Our Voice.” NeuroscienceNews. NeuroscienceNews, 29 June 2017. http://neurosciencenews.com/voice-social-status-7008/

Original Study: Perceived differences in social status between speaker and listener affect the speaker’s vocal characteristics
Juan David Leongómez, Viktoria R. Mileva , Anthony C. Little , S. Craig Roberts
Published: June 14, 2017
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179407
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0179407