Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 285–309 | Cite as

Eye Gaze and Head Posture Jointly Influence Judgments of Dominance, Physical Strength, and Anger

  • Hugo Toscano
  • Thomas W. Schubert
  • Steffen R. Giessner
Original Paper


Social status hierarchies are a universal principle of organization in human societies. Status judgments are often influenced by perceptions of the face and posture. Two important nonverbal cues of social status are head postures and eye gaze. Prior research has shown contradictory results and little is known about the interaction of these two cues. Study 1 investigated how eye gaze (direct vs. averted) and head postures (bowed vs. neutral vs. raised) impact judgments of dominance and physical strength. Judgments of dominance were influenced more than judgments of physical strength. Furthermore, raised heads implied dominance and strength, but in contrast to common assumptions, a bowed head conveyed dominance if the eyes gazed at the observer. Study 2 showed that bowed heads with direct gaze conveyed anger, potentially explaining the increased judgments of dominance. Taken together, the results show that head posture and gaze interactively modulated status-related traits and emotions, namely, dominance, strength, and anger, and help clarify prior incompatible findings on head postures and eye gaze.


Social status hierarchies Dominance Physical strength Eye gaze Head postures Anger 



This research was conducted with support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) Grant SFRH/BD/75435/2010.

Supplementary material

10919_2018_276_MOESM1_ESM.docx (86 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 85 kb)


  1. Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. Oxford: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aronoff, J., Woike, B. A., & Hyman, L. M. (1992). Which are the stimuli in facial displays of anger and happiness? Configurational bases of emotion recognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1050–1066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aviezer, H., Trope, Y., & Todorov, A. (2012). Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and negative emotions. Science, 338, 1225–1229.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). The eye direction detector (EDD) and the shared attention mechanism: Two cases for evolutionary psychology. In C. Moore & J. Philip (Eds.), Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 41–59). Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  5. Bassili, J. N. (1979). Emotion recognition: The role of facial movement and the relative importance of upper and lower areas of the face. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2049–2058.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bindemann, M., Burton, A. M., & Langton, S. R. (2008). How do eye gaze and facial expression interact? Visual Cognition, 16, 708–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaker, N. M., & van Vugt, M. (2014). The status-size hypothesis: How cues of physical size and social status influence each other. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C. Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 119–137). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Burke, D., & Sulikowski, D. (2010). A new viewpoint on the evolution of sexually dimorphic human faces. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 573–585.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, R., Wallace, S., & Benson, P. J. (1996). Real men don’t look down: Direction of gaze affects sex decisions on faces. Visual Cognition, 3, 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chiao, J. Y. (2010). Neural basis of social status hierarchy across species. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20, 803–809.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiao, J. Y., Adams, R. B., Peter, U. T., Lowenthal, W. T., Richeson, J. A., & Ambady, N. (2008). Knowing who’s boss: fMRI and ERP investigations of social dominance perception. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11, 201–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Correll, J., Hudson, S. M., Guillermo, S., & Earls, H. A. (2016). Of kith and kin: Perceptual enrichment, expectancy, and reciprocity in face perception. Personality and Social Psychology Review. Scholar
  15. Coss, R. G. (1978). Perceptual determinants of gaze aversion by the lesser mouse lemur (Microcebus muri-nus), the role of two facing eyes. Behaviour, 64, 248–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cummins, D. D. (2005). Dominance, status, and social hierarchies. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The evolutionary psychology handbook (pp. 676–697). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  17. Dalmaso, M., Galfano, G., Coricelli, C., & Castelli, L. (2014). Temporal dynamics underlying the modulation of social status on social attention. PLoS ONE, 9, e93139.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Dalmaso, M., Pavan, G., Castelli, L., & Galfano, G. (2012). Social status gates social attention in humans. Biology Letters, 8, 450–452.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. New York: D. Appleton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Gelder, B., Meeren, H. K. M., Righart, R., Stock, J., van de Riet, W. A. C., & Tamietto, M. (2006). Beyond the face: Exploring rapid influences of context on face processing. Progress in Brain Research, 155, 37–48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. de Waal, F. (2007). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dotsch, R., & Todorov, A. (2012). Reverse correlating social face perception. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 562–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ewbank, M. P., Jennings, C., & Calder, A. J. (2009). Why are you angry with me facial expressions of threat influence perception of gaze direction. Journal of Vision, 9(12), 1–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Facegen Main Software Development Kit 3.5. (2013). Vancouver, BC: Singular inversions.Google Scholar
  25. Farroni, T., Csibra, G., Simion, F., & Johnson, M. H. (2002). Eye contact detection in humans from birth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 9602–9605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fiske, A. P. (1992). The four elementary forms of sociality: Framework for a unified theory of social relations. Psychological Review, 99, 689–723.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118, 247–279.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Giessner, S. R., Ryan, M. K., Schubert, T. W., & van Quaquebeke, N. (2011). The power of pictures: Vertical picture angles in power pictures. Media Psychology, 14, 442–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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, 898–924.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hehman, E., Flake, J. K., & Freeman, J. B. (2015). Static and dynamic facial cues differentially affect the consistency of social evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1123–1134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Hehman, E., Leitner, J. B., & Gaertner, S. L. (2013). Enhancing static facial features increases intimidation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 747–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hess, U., Blairy, S., & Kleck, R. E. (2000). The influence of facial emotion displays, gender, and ethnicity on judgments of dominance and affiliation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24, 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hess, U., & Hareli, S. (2015). The role of social context for the interpretation of emotional facial expressions. Understanding facial expressions in communication (pp. 119–141). India: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Holland, E., Wolf, E. B., Looser, C., & Cuddy, A. (2016). Visual attention to powerful postures: People avert their gaze from nonverbal dominance displays. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 68, 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jenkins, R., White, D., Van Montfort, X., & Mike Burton, A. (2011). Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition, 121, 313–323.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Main, J. C., Little, A. C., Welling, L. L., Feinberg, D. R., et al. (2010). Facial cues of dominance modulate the short-term gaze-cuing effect in human observers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 277, 617–624.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Judd, C. M. (2000). Everyday data analysis in social psychology. Comparisons of linear models. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 370–392). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Judd, C. M., McClelland, G. H., & Ryan, C. S. (2009). Data analysis. A model comparison approach. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Judd, C. M., Westfall, J., & Kenny, D. A. (2012). Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 54–69.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Knutson, B. (1996). Facial expressions of emotion influence interpersonal trait inferences. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 20, 165–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lobmaier, J., Tiddeman, B. P., & Perrett, D. I. (2008). Emotional expression modulates perceived gaze direction. Emotion, 8, 573–577.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. LoBue, V., & Larson, C. L. (2010). What makes an angry face look so… angry? Examining visual attention to the shape of threat in children and adults. Visual Cognition, 18, 1165–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lukaszewski, A. W., Simmons, Z. L., Anderson, C., & Roney, J. R. (2010).The role of physical formidability in human social status allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 385–406.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Macrae, C. N., & Martin, D. (2007). A boy primed Sue: Feature-based processing and person construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 793–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Main, J. C., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Little, A. (2009). Integrating gaze direction and sexual dimorphism of face shape when perceiving the dominance of others. Perception, 38, 1275–1283.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Marsh, A. A., Adams, R. B., & Kleck, R. E. (2005). Why do fear and anger look the way they do? Form and social function in facial expressions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 73–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Martinez, L., Falvello, V. B., Aviezer, H., & Todorov, A. (2016). Contributions of facial expressions and body language to the rapid perception of dynamic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 30, 939–952.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mendelson, M. J., Haith, M. M., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1982). Face scanning and responsiveness to social cues in infant rhesus monkeys. Developmental Psychology, 18, 222–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mignault, A., & Chaudhuri, A. (2003). The many faces of a neutral face: Head tilt and perception of dominance and emotion. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27, 111–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 11087–11092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Perrett, D. I., Lee, K. J., Penton-Voak, I., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., Burt, D. M., et al. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884–887.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Perrett, D. I., & Mistlin, A. J. (1990). Perception of facial characteristics by monkeys. In W. C. Stebbins & M. A. Berkley (Eds.), Comparative perception: Complex signals. Wiley series in neuroscience (Vol. 2, pp. 187–215). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  56. Redican, W. K. (1982). An evolutionary perspective on human facial displays. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Emotion in the human face (pp. 212–280). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Rhodes, G., Lie, H. C., Thevaraja, N., Taylor, L., Iredell, N., Curran, C., et al. (2011). Facial attractiveness ratings from video-clips and static images tell the same story. PLoS ONE, 6, e26653.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Richeson, J. A., Todd, A. R., Trawalter, S., & Baird, A. A. (2008). Eye-gaze direction modulates race-related amygdala activity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11, 233–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rule, N. O., Adams, R. B., Jr., Ambady, N., & Freeman, J. B. (2012). Perceptions of dominance following glimpses of faces and bodies. Perception, 41, 687–706.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., & Adams, R. B., Jr. (2009). Personality in perspective: Judgmental consistency across orientations of the face. Perception, 38, 1688–1699.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Rymarczyk, K., Żurawski, Ł., Jankowiak-Siuda, K., & Szatkowska, I. (2016). Do dynamic compared to static facial expressions of happiness and anger reveal enhanced facial mimicry? PLoS ONE, 11, e0158534.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Schmid Mast, M., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Who is the boss and who is not? Accuracy of judging status. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Schneider, T. M., & Carbon, C. C. (2017). Taking the perfect selfie: Investigating the impact of perspective on the perception of higher cognitive variables. Frontiers in Psychology. Scholar
  64. Schneider, T. M., Hecht, H., & Carbon, C. C. (2012). Judging body weight from faces: The height–weight illusion. Perception, 41, 121–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Sell, A., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2014). The human anger face evolved to enhance cues of strength. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35, 425–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sell, A., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., Sznycer, D., von Rueden, C., & Gurven, M. (2009a). 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Sell, A., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2009b). Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 15073–15078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Senju, A., & Hasegawa, T. (2005). Direct gaze captures visuospatial attention. Visual Cognition, 12, 127–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sessa, P., & Dalmaso, M. (2016). Race perception and gaze direction differently impair visual working memory for faces: An event-related potential study. Social Neuroscience, 11, 97–107.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2013). Life after p-hacking. In Meeting of the society for personality and social psychology, New Orleans, LA (pp. 17–19).Google Scholar
  71. Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sutherland, C. A., Oldmeadow, J. A., Santos, I. M., Towler, J., Michael Burt, D., & Young, A. W. (2013). Social inferences from faces: Ambient images generate a three-dimensional model. Cognition, 127, 105–118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Sutherland, C. A., Young, A. W., & Rhodes, G. (2017). Facial first impressions from another angle: How social judgements are influenced by changeable and invariant facial properties. British Journal of Psychology, 108, 397–415.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Tiedens, L. Z., Ellsworth, P. C., & Mesquita, B. (2000). Stereotypes about sentiments and status: Emotional expectations for high- and low-status group members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 560–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tipper, S., & Bayliss, A. (2011). The impact of social gaze perception on attention. In A. Calder, G. Rhodes, M. Johnson, & J. Haxby (Eds.), Handbook of face perception (pp. 551–570). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  77. Todorov, A., & Porter, J. (2014). Misleading first impressions: Different for different facial images of the same person. Psychological Science, 25, 1404–1417.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Toscano, H., Schubert, T. W., Dotsch, R., Falvello, V., & Todorov, A. (2016). Physical strength as a cue to dominance: A data-driven approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1603–1616.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Toscano, H., Schubert, T. W., & Sell, A. N. (2014). Judgments of dominance from the face track physical strength. Evolutionary Psychology, 12, 1–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. van Vugt, M., & Tybur, J. M. (2015). The evolutionary foundations of hierarchy: Status, dominance, prestige, and leadership. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (2nd ed., pp. 788–809). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  81. von Rueden, C. (2014). The roots and fruits of social status in small-scale human societies. In J. Cheng, J. Tracy, & C. Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 179–200). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  82. von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2011). Why do men seek status? Fitness payoffs to dominance and prestige. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278, 2223–2232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Windhager, S., Schaefer, K., & Fink, B. (2011). Geometric morphometrics of male facial shape in relation to physical strength and perceived atractiveness, dominance, and masculinity. American Journal of Human Biology, 23, 805–814.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Zebrowitz, L. A. (2011). Ecological and social approaches to face perception. In A. Calder, G. Rhodes, M. Johnson, & J. Haxby (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of face perception (pp. 31–50). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Zebrowitz, L. A., Kikuchi, M., & Fellous, J.-M. (2010). Facial resemblance to emotions: Group differences, impression effects, and race stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 175–189.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centro de Investigação e Intervenção Social, LisboaInstituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL)LisbonPortugal
  2. 2.University of OsloOsloNorway
  3. 3.Rotterdam School of ManagementErasmus UniversityRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations