Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Status-Size Hypothesis: How Cues of Physical Size and Social Status Influence Each Other

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Psychology of Social Status

Abstract

The current chapter investigates the relationship between someone’s physical size and assessments of their social status. Physical size is related to status in many species—including humans—and may affect both real and perceived status. We refer to this as the status-size hypothesis, the automatic association between physical size and position in a status hierarchy. We review the evidence for this hypothesis, drawing on both human and non-human data. Furthermore, we distinguish between different aspects of physical size and pathways to obtain status in groups with implications for the status-size effect. We find that height and muscularity differently affect status perception, and that status obtained through coercion (dominance) differently affects size perception than status obtained through voluntary deference (prestige). Furthermore, contextual cues of competition versus cooperation moderate the status–size relationship. A review of results from various studies, including our own, supports various predictions from the hypothesis: (a) high status dominant and prestigious individuals are estimated taller, and (b) taller individuals are estimated higher in prestige and dominance-based status; (c) dominant high-status individuals are perceived as more muscular than prestigious high-status individuals, (d) more muscular individuals are perceived as dominant but not necessarily prestigious; finally (e) unlike adults, primary school-aged children associate size with dominance but not with prestige, suggesting that though dominance may be universally linked to increased size, the relationship between height and prestige is culturally learned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In human hierarchies these may not just be submissive-dominant displays, but also respectful displays. For instance some languages have different pronouns which are used to address individuals with more respect, such as older or high ranking individuals. In French, “tu” means “you” and is used to address peers and can be seen as disrespectful when used to address certain others, while “vous” also means “you” but is used to convey respect or is used in formal situations. This is related to prestige-based status, and will be discussed later on.

References

  • Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bielicki, T., & Charzewski, J. (1983). Body height and upward social mobility. Annals of Human Biology, 10, 403–408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bielicki, T., & Waliszko, H. (1992). Stature, upward social mobility and the nature of statural differences between social classes. Annals of Human Biology, 19, 589–593.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blaker, N. M., Rompa, I., Dessing, I. H., Vriend, A. F., Herschberg, C., & van Vugt, M. (2013). The height leadership advantage in men and women: Testing evolutionary psychology predictions about the perceptions of tall leaders. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16, 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böckerman, P., Johansson, E., Kiiskinen, U., & Heliövaara, M. (2010). The relationship between physical work and the height premium: Finnish evidence. Economics & Human Biology, 8, 414–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozoyan, C., & Wolbring, T. (2011). Fat, muscles, and wages. Economics & Human Biology, 9, 356–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, R., Scott, I. M., Maklakov, A. A., Kasumovic, M. M., Clark, A. P., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2011). National income inequality predicts women’s preferences for masculinized faces better than health does. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 278, 810–812.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buttermore, N. (2006). Distinguishing dominance and prestige: validation of a self-report scale. Poster presented at the Human Behavior and Evolution Society’s 18th Annual Meeting. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. (1984). Girls’ talk: The social representation of aggression by female gang members. Criminal justice and behavior, 11, 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case, A., & Paxson, C. (2006). Stature and status: Height, ability, and labor market outcomes. Journal of Political Economy, 116, 499–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cashdan, E. (1998). Smiles, speech, and body posture: How women and men display sociometric status and power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 209–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 334–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. (2013). Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 103–125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, S., & Geary, K. (2005). Physical stature influences character perception in women. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1927–1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chudek, M., Heller, S., Birch, S., & Henrich, J. (2012). Prestige-biased cultural learning: Bystander’s differential attention to potential models influences children’s learning. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 46–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dannenmaier, W. D., & Thumin, F. J. (1964). Authority status as a factor in perceptual distortion of size. The Journal of Social Psychology, 63, 361–365.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Decety, J., Jackson, P. L., Sommerville, J. A., Chaminade, T., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2004). The neural bases of cooperation and competition: An fMRI investigation. NeuroImage, 23, 744–751.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deibert, P., König, D., Schmidt-Trucksaess, A., Zaenker, K. S., Frey, I., Landmann, U., & Berg, A. (2004). Weight loss without losing muscle mass in pre-obese and obese subjects induced by a high-soy-protein diet. International Journal of Obesity, 28, 1349–1352.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duguid, M. M., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). Living large the powerful overestimate their own height. Psychological Science, 23, 36–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, B. J. (1992). The evolution of sexual attraction: Evaluative mechanisms in women. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 267–288). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egolf, D. B., & Corder, L. E. (1991). Height differences of low and high job status, female and male corporate employees. Sex Roles, 24, 365–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fessler, D. M., Holbrook, C., & Snyder, J. K. (2012). Weapons make the man (larger): Formidability is represented as size and strength in humans. PloS One, 7, e32751.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, A. C., O’Brien, D. T., White, D. D., & Wilson, D. S. (2010). Handgrip strength and socially dominant behavior in male adolescents. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 229–243.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gawley, T., Perks, T., & Curtis, J. (2009). Height, gender, and authority status at work: Analyses for a national sample of Canadian workers. Sex Roles, 60, 208–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griggs, R. C., Kingston, W., Jozefowicz, R. F., Herr, B. E., Forbes, G., & Halliday, D. (1989). ­Effect of testosterone on muscle mass and muscle protein synthesis. Journal of Applied Physiology, 66, 498–503.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamstra, M. R. (2013). ‘Big’ men: Male leaders’ height positively relates to followers’ perception of charisma. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 190–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haviland, W. A. (1967). Stature at Tikal, Guatemala: Implications for ancient Maya demography and social organization. American Antiquity, 3, 316–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haley, M. P., Deutsch, C. J., & LeBoeuf, B. J. (1994). Size, dominance and copulatory success in male northern elephant seals. Animal Behavior, 48, 1249–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. (2001). The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 165–196.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hensley, W. E. (1993). Height as a measure of success in Academe. Psychology: A Journal of ­Human Behavior, 30, 40–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huygens, W., Thomis, M. A., Peeters, M. W., Vlietinck, R. F., & Beunen, G. P. (2004). Determinants and upper-limit heritabilities of skeletal muscle mass and strength. Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology, 29, 186–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. A. (1987). Dominance rank in juvenile olive baboons, Papio anubis: The influence of gender, size, maternal rank and orphaning. Animal Behaviour, 35, 1694–1708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. T., Burk, J. A., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2007). Dominance and prestige as differential predictors of aggression and testosterone levels in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 345–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. A., Rutherford, O. M., & Parker, D. F. (1989). Physiological changes in skeletal muscle as a result of strength training. Experimental Physiology, 74, 233–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (2004). The effect of physical height on workplace success and income: Preliminary test of a theoretical model. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 428–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalick, S. M. (1988). Physical attractiveness as a status cue. Journal of Experimental Social ­Psychology, 24, 469–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keating, C. F., & Doyle, J. (2002). The faces of desirable mates and dates contain mixed social status cues. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 414–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. J., Johnson, D. D. P., & Van Vugt, M. (2009). The origins and evolution of leadership. Current Biology, 19, 911–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurzban, R., & Weeden, J. (2005). HurryDate: Mate preferences in action. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindeman, M., & Sundvik, L. (1994). Impact of height on assessments of Finnish female job applicants’ managerial abilities. Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 169–174.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A., & Roberts, S. C. (2012). Evolution, appearance, and occupational success. Evolutionary Psychology, 10, 782–801.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little, A. C., Cohen, D. L., Jones, B. C., & Belsky, J. (2007). Human preferences for facial masculinity change with relationship type and environmental harshness. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61, 967–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long, J. D., & Pellegrini, A. D. (2003). Studying change in dominance and bullying with linear mixed models. School Psychology Review, 32, 401–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., & Hall, R. (2003). Identity, leadership categorization, and leadership schema. In D. Van Knippenberg & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Leadership and power: Identity processes in organizations (pp. 48–64). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & De Vader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 343–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masur, A., Masur, J., & Keating, C. (1984). Military rank attainment of a West Point class: Effects of cadets’ physical features. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 125–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, S. J. H. (2001). Height, social threat, and victory margin in presidential elections (1894–1992). Psychological Reports, 88, 741–742.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, L. (2007). Socioeconomic status and obesity. Epidemiologic Reviews, 29, 29–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McEvoy, B. P., & Visscher, P. M. (2009). Genetics of human height. Economics & Human Biology, 7, 294–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melamed, T. (1992). Personality correlates of physical height. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 1349–1350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, G. R., & Schmitz, J. D. (2011). Caveman politics: Evolutionary leadership preferences and physical stature. Social Science Quarterly, 92, 1215–1235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, G. A. (1974). Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 47, 223–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pavey, C. R., & Fielder, D. R. (1996). The influence of size differntial on agonistic behaviour in the freshwater crayfish, Cherax cuspidatus (Decapoda: Parastacidae). Journal of Zoology, 238, 445–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perusse, L., Lortie, G., Leblanc, C., Tremblay, A., Theriault, G., & Bouchard, C. (1987). ­Genetic and environmental sources of variation in physical fitness. Annals of Human Biology, 14, 425–434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrini, A. D., Roseth, C. J., Mliner, S., Bohn, C. M., Van Ryzin, M., Vance, N., & Tarullo, A. (2007). Social dominance in preschool classrooms. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 121, 54–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, M. B., Sznycer, D., Sell, A., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2013). The ancestral logic of politics: Upper body strength regulates men’s assertion of self-interest over economic redistribution. Psychological Science, 24, 1098–1103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, M. (1984). Territory size in the moorhen (Gallinula chloropus): An outcome of RHP asymmetry between neighbours. Animal Behaviour, 32, 861–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, M. E., Kang, J., Dunn, J., & Hopkins, S. (2011). Muscularity and attractiveness as predictors of human egalitarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 636–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A. (2010). Beauty and the beast: Mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puts, D. A., Hodges, C. R., Cárdenas, R. A., & Gaulin, S. J. (2007). Men’s voices as dominance signals: Vocal fundamental and formant frequencies influence dominance attributions among men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 340–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, D. I. (1978). On predation, competition, and the advantages of group living. Perspectives in Ethology, 3, 205–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahlins, M. D. (1963). Poor man, rich man, big-man, chief: Political types in Melanesia and Polynesia. Comparative studies in society and history, 5, 285–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, A. (1982). On the significance of stature in human society. Journal of Human Evolution, 11, 697–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sell, A., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Sznycer, D., von Rueden, C., & Gurven, M. (2009). Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276, 575–584.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sell, A., Hone, L. S., & Pound, N. (2012). The importance of physical strength to human males. Human Nature, 23, 30–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shariff, A. F., & Tracy, J. L. (2009). Knowing who’s boss: Implicit perceptions of status from the nonverbal expression of pride. Emotion (Washington, D. C.), 9, 631–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silventoinen, K. (2003). Determinants of variation in adult body height. Journal of Biosocial Science, 35, 263–285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Silventoinen, K., Kaprio, J., & Lahelma, E. (2000). Genetic and environmental contributions to the association between body height and educational attainment: A study of adult Finnish twins. Behavior Genetics, 30, 477–485.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spisak, B. R., Dekker, P. H., Krüger, M., & van Vugt, M. (2012). Warriors and peacekeepers: Testing a biosocial implicit leadership hypothesis of intergroup relations using masculine and feminine faces. PloS one, 7, e30399.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stulp, G. (2013). Sex stature status: Natural selection on contemporary human populations. Doctoral Dissertation, available from KLI and University of Groningen. ISBN:978-90-367-6010-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stulp, G., Buunk, A. P., Verhulst, S., & Pollet, T. V. (2013). Tall claims? Sense and nonsense about the importance of height of US presidents. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. W., Hasson, O., & Clark, D. L. (2001). Initiation and resolution of jumping spider contests: Roles for size, proximity, and early detection of rivals. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 50, 403–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomis, M. A., Beunen, G. P., Maes, H. H., Blimkie, C. J., Van Leemputte, M., Claessens, A. L., & Vlietinck, R. F. (1998). Strength training: Importance of genetic factors. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 30, 724–731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomsen, L., Frankenhuis, W. E., Ingold-Smith, M., & Carey, S. (2011). Big and mighty: Preverbal infants mentally represent social dominance. Science, 331, 477–480.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tiedens, L. Z. (2001). Anger and advancement versus sadness and subjugation: The effect of negative emotion expressions on social status conferral. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 86–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 19–136). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Undurraga, E. A., Zebrowitz, L., Eisenberg, D. T., Reyes-García, V., & Godoy, R. A. (2012). The perceived benefits of height: Strength, dominance, social concern, and knowledge among Bolivian native Amazonians. PloS One, 7, e35391.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P. A. M., Balliet, D. P., Parks, C. D., & van Vugt M. (2013). Social dilemmas: Understanding the psychology of human cooperation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M., & Ahuja, A. (2010). Selected: Why some people lead, others follow, and why it matters. London: Profile.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M., & Kameda, T. (2012). Evolution and groups. In J. T. Levine (Ed.), Group processes (pp. 297–332). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Vugt, M., & Ronay, R. (2013). The evolutionary psychology of leadership: Theory, review, and roadmap. Organizational Psychology Review. Advance Online Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63, 182–196.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2008). The multiple dimensions of male social status in an Amazonian society. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 402–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wada, R., & Tekin, E. (2010). Body composition and wages. Economics & Human Biology, 8, 242–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, P. R. (1968). Perceptual distortion of height as a function of ascribed academic status. The Journal of Social Psychology, 74, 97–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yap, A. J., Mason, M. F., & Ames, D. R. (2013). The powerful size others down: The link between power and estimates of others’ size. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 591–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, T. J., & French, L. A. (1996). Height and perceived competence of US presidents. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 82, 1002.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands

    Nancy M. Blaker & Mark van Vugt

Authors
  1. Nancy M. Blaker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark van Vugt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy M. Blaker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA

    Joey T. Cheng

  2. Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Jessica L. Tracy

  3. Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA

    Cameron Anderson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blaker, N., van Vugt, M. (2014). The Status-Size Hypothesis: How Cues of Physical Size and Social Status Influence Each Other. In: Cheng, J., Tracy, J., Anderson, C. (eds) The Psychology of Social Status. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0867-7_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation