Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 317–337

Picture Power: Gender Versus Body Language in Perceived Status

Original Paper

Abstract

Power hierarchies in interaction are maintained due to a variety of cues, including gender and body language, and can keep competent individuals from being regarded as high status. The present study primed participants with an image consisting of two components—gender (man or woman) and body pose (dominant or submissive)—and then asked participants to classify written target words as either dominant or submissive. In response to these target words, we measured accuracy (% incorrect) and classification speed (RT), in addition to event-related potentials (ERPs), from 23 participants. Although we did not find ERP differences in the predicted N400 component, error rate and RT measures indicated that regardless of the gender of the prime, dominant poses facilitated identification of dominant words. Interestingly, whereas female submissive posing facilitated classification of submissive target words, male submissive posing did not. These results support the idea that women can use counter-stereotypical nonverbal displays, dominant poses, to change how they are initially perceived in terms of power. Interestingly, men may be more limited in the success of their counter-stereotypical, submissive, posing. Potential underlying mechanisms are discussed.

Keywords

Gender Power Pose Body language Dominance 

References

  1. Aguinis, H., & Henley, C. A. (2001). Effects of nonverbal behavior on perceptions of a female employee’s power bases. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(4), 537–549.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguinis, H., Simonsen, M. M., & Pierce, C. A. (1998). Effects of nonverbal behavior on perceptions of power bases. The Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 455–469.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 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(1), 116.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Aries, E. (1996). Men and women in interaction: Reconsidering the differences. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Banaji, M. R., & Hardin, C. D. (1996). Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7(3), 136–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bentin, S., McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Event-related potentials, lexical decision and semantic priming. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 60(4), 343–355.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Biernat, M. (2009). Stereotypes and shifting standards. In T. D. Nelson (Ed.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 137–152). New York: Taylor & Francis Group LLC.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, C., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(1), 34–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Buss, D. M. (2004). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Incorporated.Google Scholar
  10. Carli, L. L., Loeber, C. C., & LaFleur, S. J. (1995). Nonverbal behavior, gender, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1030–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power posing: Brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363–1368.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Carney, D. R., Hall, J. A., & LeBeau, L. S. (2005). Beliefs about the nonverbal expression of social power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29(2), 105–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Catalyst. (2013). Women CEOs of the fortune 1000. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-ceos-fortune-1000
  14. Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(4), 413–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Center for American Women and Politics. (2013). Women in the US Congress 2013. Retrieved from http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/fast_facts/levels_of_office/documents/cong.pdf.
  16. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Den Hagg: Mouton.Google Scholar
  17. de Gelder, B. (2006). Towards the neurobiology of emotional body language. Neuroscience, 7, 242–249.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. de Gelder, B., van den Stock, J., Meeren, H. K. M., Sinke, C. B. A., Kret, M. E., & Tamietto, M. (2010). Standing up for the body. Recent progress in uncovering the networks involved in the perception of bodies and bodily expressions. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 513–527.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. de Lemus, S., Spears, R., & Moya, M. (2012). The power of a smile to move you: Complementary submissiveness in women’s posture as a function of gender salience and facial expression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(11), 1480–1494.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. DePaulo, B. M. (1992). Nonverbal behavior and self-presentation. Psychological Bulletin, 111(2), 203–243.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Dovidio, J. F., Ellyson, S. L., Keating, C. F., Heltman, K., & Brown, C. E. (1988). The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance between men and women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(2), 233–242.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, St. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Fisek, M. H., & Ofshe, R. (1970). The process of status evolution. Sociometry, 33(3), 327–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2006). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Foschi, M. (2000). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gifford, R., & Hine, D. W. (1994). The role of verbal behavior in the encoding and decoding of interpersonal dispositions. Journal of Research in Personality, 28(2), 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifacts. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 55, 468–484.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hai, D. M., Khairullah, Z. Y., & Coulmas, N. (1982). Sex and the single armrest: Use of personal space during air travel. Psychological Report, 51, 743–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hall, J. A. (1990). Nonverbal sex differences: Accuracy of communication and expressive style. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Hall, J. A. (1998). How big are nonverbal sex differences? The case of smiling and sensitivity to nonverbal cues. In D. J. Canary & K. Dindia (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication (pp. 155–178). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  35. Hall, J. A., Coats, E. J., & LeBeau, L. S. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 898–924.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hemmer, J., & Kleiber, D. (1981). Tomboys and sissies: Androgynous children? Sex Roles, 7, 1205–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Henley, N. M. (1995). Body politics revisited: What do we know today? In P. J. Kalbfleisch & M. J. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 27–61). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. Hess, U., Adams, R. B, Jr, & Kleck, R. E. (2004). Facial appearance, gender, and emotion expression. Emotion, 4(4), 378–388.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Hilgenkamp, K. D., & Livingston, M. M. (2002). Tomboys, masculine characteristics, and self-ratings of confidence in career success. Psychological Reports, 90, 743–749.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Hinzman, L., & Kelly, S. D. (2013). Effects of emotional body language on rapid out-group judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(1), 152–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., Patto, F., Levin, S., Thomsen, L., Kteily, N., & Sheehy-Skeffington, J. (2012). Social dominance orientation: Revisiting the structure and function of a variable predicting social and political attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(5), 583–606.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Holcomb, P. J., Reder, L., Misra, M., & Grainger, J. (2005). The effects of prime visibility on ERP measures of masked priming. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(1), 155–172.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Keating, C. F. (2011). Channeling charisma through face and body status cues. In D. Chadee & A. Kostic (Eds.), Social psychological dynamics (pp. 93–111). Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kelly, S. D., Kravitz, C., & Hopkins, M. (2004). Neural correlates of bimodal speech and gesture comprehension. Brain and Language, 89, 253–260.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Key, A. P. F., Dove, G. O., & Maguire, M. J. (2005). Linking brainwaves to the brain: An ERP primer. Developmental Neuropsychology, 27(2), 183–215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Koenig, A. M., Eagly, A. H., Mitchell, A. A., & Ristikari, T. (2011). Are leader stereotypes masculine? A meta-analysis of three research paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 616–642.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2000). Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 463–470.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(14), 1–27.Google Scholar
  49. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203–205.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Letters to Nature, 307, 161–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Landy, D., & Sigall, H. (1974). Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer’s physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29(3), 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Leuthold, H., Filik, R., Murphy, K., & Mackenzie, I. G. (2012). The on-line processing of socio-emotional information in prototypical scenarios: Inferences from brain potentials. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(4), 457–466.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Levant, R. F., & Pollack, W. S. (1995). Introduction. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A New psychology of men (pp. 1–10). New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
  54. Lyons, M., Lynch, A., Brewer, G., & Bruno, D. (2014). Detection of sexual orientation (“gaydar”) by homosexual and heterosexual women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(2), 345–352.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Maricchiolo, F., Livi, S., Bonaiuto, M., & Gnisci, A. (2011). Hand gestures and perceived influence in small group interaction. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14(2), 755–764.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Mazur, A., Rosa, E., Faupel, M., Heller, J., Leen, R., & Thurman, B. (1980). Physiological aspects of communication via mutual gaze. American Journal of Sociology, 86(1), 50–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Meeren, H. K. M., van Heijnsbergen, C. C. R. J., & de Gelder, B. (2005). Rapid perceptual integration of facial expression and emotional body language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 102(45), 16518–16523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Miller, G. A., Gratton, G., & Yee, C. M. (1988). Generalized implementation of an eye movement correction procedure. Psychophysiology, 25, 241–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Moore, H. A., & Porter, N. K. (1988). Leadership and nonverbal behavior of Hispanic females across school equity environments. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Murphy, K. R., Myors, B., & Wolach, A. H. (2009). Statistical power analysis: A simple and general model for traditional and modern hypothesis tests. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. O’Neil, J. M., Good, G. E., & Holmes, S. (1995). Fifteen years of theory and research on men’s gender role conflict: New paradigms for empirical research. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 164–206). New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
  62. Parker, P. S., & Ogilvie, D. T. (1996). Gender, culture, and leadership: Toward a culturally distinct model of African-American women executives’ leadership strategies. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 189–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pleck, J. H. (1995). The gender role strain paradigm: An update. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 11–32). New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
  64. Poling, T. H. (1978). Sex differences, dominance, and physical attractiveness in the use of nonverbal emblems. Psychological Reports, 43, 1087–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Powell, G. N., & Butterfield, D. A. (1989). The “good manager” Did androgyny fare better in the 1980s? Group and Organization Management, 14(2), 216–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ridgeway, C. L. (1987). Nonverbal behavior, dominance, and the basis of status in task groups. American Sociological Review, 52, 683–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosenwasser, S. M., & Dean, N. G. (1989). Gender role and political office. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13(1), 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schmid Mast, M., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Who is the boss and who is not? Accuracy of judging status. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28(3), 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sczesny, S. (2003). A closer look beneath the surface: Various facets of the think-manager-think- male stereotype. Sex Roles, 49, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sczesny, S., Spreemann, S., & Stahlberg, D. (2006). Masculine = competent? Physical appearance and sex as sources of gender-stereotypic attributions. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (2012). Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research (4th ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  73. Stekelenburg, J. J., & de Gelder, B. (2004). The neural correlates of perceiving human bodies: An ERP study on the body-inversion effect. NeuroReport, 15(9), 777–780.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Petersson, K. M., van Berkum, J. J. A., van den Brink, D., Buitelaar, J. K., & Hagoort, P. (2009). Unification of speaker and meaning in language comprehension: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(11), 2085–2099.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Tiedens, L. Z., & Fragale, A. R. (2003). Power moves: Complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(3), 558–568.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. van Berkum, J. J. A. (2008). Understanding sentences in context: What brain waves can tell us. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), 376–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. van Berkum, J. J. A., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. van den Stock, J., Righart, R., & de Gelder, B. (2007). Body expressions influence recognition of emotions in the face and voice. Emotion, 7(3), 487–494.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. van Heijnsbergen, C. C. R. J., Meeren, H. K. M., Grézes, J., & de Gelder, B. (2007). Rapid detection of fear in body expressions, an ERP study. Brain Research, 1186, 233–241.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Visscher, P. M. (2008). Sizing up human height variation. Nature Genetics, 40(5), 489–490.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. White, K. R., Crites, S. L, Jr, Taylor, J. H., & Corral, G. (2009). Wait, what? Assessing stereotype incongruities using the N400 ERP component. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4(2), 191–198.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Yang, P. (2010). Nonverbal gender differences: examining gestures of university-educated Mandarin Chinese speakers. Text and Talk, 30(3), 333–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Colgate University, Department of PsychologyHamiltonUSA
  2. 2.Yale University, Department of PsychologyNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations