On Testosterone: Driving a Porsche vs. Camry(bobsutton.typepad.com)
bobsutton.typepad.com
On Testosterone: Driving a Porsche vs. Camry
http://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/11/more-on-testosterone-levels-driving-a-porsche-vs-toyota-camry.html
36 comments
It would be great to know whether this is effect continues after driving the same car for a month or two. It could be somewhat of a novelty that wears off as soon as one is acclimated.
So I can buy naturally induced testosterone for only $150,000/yr? Sweet!
To be fair, you could probably do it for much less with only a moderately obscenely expensive car like something in the $75k range. Factor in resale, you're looking at driving a freaking sweet car (and getting really amped about it) for only $25,000-40,000/yr! Sweet!
Now if only we had a start-up plan... something to do with life coaches for the rich and famous?
To be fair, you could probably do it for much less with only a moderately obscenely expensive car like something in the $75k range. Factor in resale, you're looking at driving a freaking sweet car (and getting really amped about it) for only $25,000-40,000/yr! Sweet!
Now if only we had a start-up plan... something to do with life coaches for the rich and famous?
I read a similar report a while ago that merely listening to a powerful car elevated testosterone from saliva samples, in women as well as men. The VW polo apparently resulted in a lowering of testosterone levels. Also, men and women responded to different cars. Interesting stuff. I would like to know if the response differs in females.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2667136/Sound-of-spor...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2667136/Sound-of-spor...
From the discussed article [1]:
"The hypotheses implicitly posit increases or decreases in T levels in relation to an individual’s baseline T. As such, we compared the participants’ two baselines (samples 1 and 6), to assess which of the two would most accurately represent their true baseline T levels, and hence to determine from which baseline we would compare their hormonal changes. Upon arriving to the laboratory, the initial social encounter with the researchers can act as a differential stressor yielding an increase in participants’ T levels. Thus, in such instances the final sample might be a better indicator of an individual’s true baseline than the first (K. E. Wynne-Edwards, personal communication, October 31, 2005). A paired t-test comparing the two baselines confirmed this to be true: the T levels of sample 6 were significantly lower than those from sample 1 (Msample6 = 2.20, SD = .16 vs. Msample1 = 2.26, SD = .21; t-stat = 2.32, df = 30, p < .05). Therefore, to test our hypotheses, we used the baseline value that stemmed from sample 6."
So, the interpretation of the experiment can be swung either way: it looks like using the other baseline would have shown that the crappy car depressed testosterone, and the Porsche had no effect.
[1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
"The hypotheses implicitly posit increases or decreases in T levels in relation to an individual’s baseline T. As such, we compared the participants’ two baselines (samples 1 and 6), to assess which of the two would most accurately represent their true baseline T levels, and hence to determine from which baseline we would compare their hormonal changes. Upon arriving to the laboratory, the initial social encounter with the researchers can act as a differential stressor yielding an increase in participants’ T levels. Thus, in such instances the final sample might be a better indicator of an individual’s true baseline than the first (K. E. Wynne-Edwards, personal communication, October 31, 2005). A paired t-test comparing the two baselines confirmed this to be true: the T levels of sample 6 were significantly lower than those from sample 1 (Msample6 = 2.20, SD = .16 vs. Msample1 = 2.26, SD = .21; t-stat = 2.32, df = 30, p < .05). Therefore, to test our hypotheses, we used the baseline value that stemmed from sample 6."
So, the interpretation of the experiment can be swung either way: it looks like using the other baseline would have shown that the crappy car depressed testosterone, and the Porsche had no effect.
[1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi...
Or it could be fast driving, not fast cars, that increases testosterone levels (the difference between highway and downtown driving in both the Porsche and the Camry group seems to suggest that possibility) -- and people driving Porsches just tend to drive faster, just like people in red cars tend to drive faster.
While it seems clear that fast driving increased T levels (both Camry and Porsche drivers increased from city to country), that isn't all that this explains.
Depending on what sort of city driving you are doing, the fact that the porsche has higher T levels in the city than the camry does in the country says something. The article argues it's the status effect. (I wonder though - if city driving means stopping (and then accelerating away from) traffic lights. That would be fun in a porsche - boring in a camry.) I'd like to see the test done with an accelerometer in the car. (But us armchair scientists can always find something wrong with an experiment can't we?)
On a related note - I really miss my old 1990 Toyota Camry - I used to be able to drive it nice and fast on some of the twisty dirt roads around here. Didn't really care what happened to it in terms of bumps, scratches, stone chips. I wouldn't do that in a 150K porsche.
Depending on what sort of city driving you are doing, the fact that the porsche has higher T levels in the city than the camry does in the country says something. The article argues it's the status effect. (I wonder though - if city driving means stopping (and then accelerating away from) traffic lights. That would be fun in a porsche - boring in a camry.) I'd like to see the test done with an accelerometer in the car. (But us armchair scientists can always find something wrong with an experiment can't we?)
On a related note - I really miss my old 1990 Toyota Camry - I used to be able to drive it nice and fast on some of the twisty dirt roads around here. Didn't really care what happened to it in terms of bumps, scratches, stone chips. I wouldn't do that in a 150K porsche.
Exactly, it seems that everyone else here is assuming the increased testosterone is because of increased perceived social status or, similarly, the result of a placebo effect causing people to "feel" more impressive/manly. This is a bald speculation without evidence.
Maybe the drivers DO feel more manly in a porsche because the drive is far different, which it is.
To draw a more accurate conclusion as to why, it may help to know how long after driving the increased testosterone levels lasted for.
If you really wanted to figure out why this occurs, a better study could involve a porsche fitted with a Toyota engine, and vice versa, to provide the same drive quality but equivalent external appearance.
Might also help to have a Porsche with a Toyota engine in a simulated environment where all other drivers are slower (so the Porsche driver is still relatively faster than other cars). Maybe the effect is from "dominating" other drivers.
TL;DR: Any speculation on why this occurs is pretty much baseless based on the information provided in the article.
Maybe the drivers DO feel more manly in a porsche because the drive is far different, which it is.
To draw a more accurate conclusion as to why, it may help to know how long after driving the increased testosterone levels lasted for.
If you really wanted to figure out why this occurs, a better study could involve a porsche fitted with a Toyota engine, and vice versa, to provide the same drive quality but equivalent external appearance.
Might also help to have a Porsche with a Toyota engine in a simulated environment where all other drivers are slower (so the Porsche driver is still relatively faster than other cars). Maybe the effect is from "dominating" other drivers.
TL;DR: Any speculation on why this occurs is pretty much baseless based on the information provided in the article.
eight out of thirty-one candidates were disqualified due to excessive blood in the mouth?
Most likely, they were taking the testosterone samples through cheek scrapes or something similar, I suppose.
This looks like a bias towards selecting hungry zombies.
I wonder if this effect wears off, if you are driving a Porsche every day. Also, it would be interesting to see how much of it is due to speed (passing/cutting off others) and how much is due to the perception of wealth. Most important, are the changes relevant biologically, i.e. are these changes on the same scale as what you get in other testosterone-raising circumstances? </review>
I don't think it entirely wears off. I bought a Civic SI (no Porsche, but still fun to drive), and while the novelty wore off, it's still a lot of fun to drive, and still just as thrilling to put your foot down and speed past people...
This can be explained by placebo. If you expect to feel more impressive and manly in a porche, then your body will react accordingly. It's not the car, it's the idea of the car, which is mostly marketing.
Of course it's placebo, that's the point. What else could it be, some substance in the car? The point is that self-perception can influence brain chemistry and hormone production.
Maybe responsiveness; quick acceleration; "Road feel"; admiring looks from nubile women; defeated looks from men; knowing that you have more power available than you need; etc.
FWIW, weight lifting could provide all except road feel.
Be the porche. And it's free. I've noticed that porche drivers are mostly older people (presumably because, statistically, they can afford it).
To be picky: it also doesn't provide responsiveness (i.e. agility), but in isolation tends to muscle boundness. Easy to address with other exercise of course.
To be picky: it also doesn't provide responsiveness (i.e. agility), but in isolation tends to muscle boundness. Easy to address with other exercise of course.
I could be the sound/vibration of the engine, the increased power/acceleration, the handling, the interior. I'm not sure all of these would classify as placebo in the traditional sense. But I'd agree it's mostly the pure placebo of knowing it's an expensive car.
Slam your foot down in the Camry, what happens? Slam your foot down in the Porsche and you're doing 150mph before you know it ... isn't the perceived danger also a large (non-placebo) factor?
In case you've never tried it, the experience of driving a Porsche is substantially different from driving a Camry. I doubt it's a placebo effect.
What else could it be, some substance in the car?
Well, maybe, and that needs to be ruled out. Plasticizer vapors, such as those present in newer cars, have been said to mimic human hormones before.
Well, maybe, and that needs to be ruled out. Plasticizer vapors, such as those present in newer cars, have been said to mimic human hormones before.
Exactly.
>I always had a sneaking suspicion that the "manly" feeling that comes from driving a sports car was nonsense promoted by car companies. But I guess it may have some truth.
Correlation != causation. If feeling manly makes testosterone go up, and you think a sports car should make you feel manly, then your testosterone will go up in a sports car. But that can only be from the ads, not from the car at all.
>I always had a sneaking suspicion that the "manly" feeling that comes from driving a sports car was nonsense promoted by car companies. But I guess it may have some truth.
Correlation != causation. If feeling manly makes testosterone go up, and you think a sports car should make you feel manly, then your testosterone will go up in a sports car. But that can only be from the ads, not from the car at all.
While I agree Correlation != causation a better example might be, driving an expensive car was novel and novel experiences increase T levels. In other words you might have increased T levels when on the test drive, but little response if you actually owned the car.
I wouldn't call it "placebo;" more like "social status." Which makes me wonder what studies on males of varying social status would indicate about long-term testosterone levels.
well a Porsche might be a poor example because its an easily recognized symbol.
what about two men entering a trendy club and one is dressed in an off the shelf suit and a $20 watch while the other is wearing a suit that costs as much as some people's monthly paychecks and a watch to fit. Will the second man project more confidence and therefor be more successful?
what about two men entering a trendy club and one is dressed in an off the shelf suit and a $20 watch while the other is wearing a suit that costs as much as some people's monthly paychecks and a watch to fit. Will the second man project more confidence and therefor be more successful?
In that case, a confounding factor is that the people in the club may be able to tell the difference between the outfits. So it isn't just the second man's confidence, it's that the people there know he's willing to blow a lot of money on looks. That may conceivably affect their reactions regardless of the man's confidence.
I wonder if you'd get the same effect with powerful used cars that cost much less. I tend to think you would.
Perhaps someone can do a better study by having isolated tribes free of advertisement exposure to have a try.
What's interesting is the discovery that the placebo effect can actually affect testosterone levels!
There are many other ways to increase testosterone levels. One, exercise; cheaper and has more long term benefits than a Porsche.
I've heard weightlifting dramatically decreases testosterone. What type of exercise are you suggesting?
Not sure where you heard that. Weightlifting increases testosterone, but it is known to lowers estrogen levels.
Various studies have been conducted on the hormonal response to exercise. It depends on loading schemes and intensity if we're talking lifting. Weigh lifting also triggers an increase of growth hormone levels post workout.
I also read quite frequently that excessive training (not necessarily to the point of overtraining, which is quite rare anyway) had a depressing effect on free T levels. I should look for that on Pubmed.
I also read quite frequently that excessive training (not necessarily to the point of overtraining, which is quite rare anyway) had a depressing effect on free T levels. I should look for that on Pubmed.
Studies like these are a joke. Everything in biology is give and take so measuring something without comparing it to some other marker is completely useless. When testosterone levels go up, invariably other things go down and it is much more useful to know how internal variables covary instead of just "oh look, fast cars means more testosterone" <- stupid.