"Hold your Head high". The influence of emotional versus neutral nonverbal expressions of dominance and submissiveness in baseball

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that athletes displaying dominant non-verbal behavior (NVB) are perceived to possess more favorable performance char-acteristics and are expected to perform better than athletes showing submissive NVB. In the present study we used point light videos of a baseball pitcher display-ing dominant, submissive, and neutral NVBs to show that this effect is mainly dri-ven by the submissive condition. No difference between the neutral and the domi-nant condition was evident, suggesting that it is more important to avoid displaying submissive NVB instead of showing dominant NVB as neutral NVB already seems to lead to the impression that the athlete can handle the situation. The results show that NVBs expressing dominance and submissiveness are important early cues that affect the impression formation process in sport and the expectancy of success of the athlete observing this NVB. In addition, the results indicate, that further informa-tion about the ability level of the athlete might diminish this effect. Performance consequences of the effect of NVB are discussed. KEY WORDS: Nonverbal behavior, Person perception, Body language, Self-effi-cacy, Evolutionary psychology. Charles Darwin proposed that many behaviors exhibited by animals are demonstrative of evolved adaptations that allow the nonverbal expression of emotions (Darwin, 1872/2009). In the recent past, Darwin's proposal has inspired the theoretical framework, referred to as the "basic emotion" approach (cf. Barrett, 2011). According to the basic emotion view, certain physiological changes underlie the nonverbal expression of a person's emo-tional state (e.g., fear). A further important tenet of the basic emotion approach is that humans are born with the ability to perceive the emotions expressed by another person. Although there is current debate on the topic

Full text

294
“Hold your Head high”. The influence of emotional
versus neutral nonverbal expressions of dominance
and submissiveness in baseball
PHILIP FURLEY*, and MATT DICKS**
* German Sport University, Cologne, Germany
* * VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Previous research has demonstrated that athletes displaying dominant non-
verbal behavior (NVB) are perceived to possess more favorable performance char-
acteristics and are expected to perform better than athletes showing submissive
NVB. In the present study we used point light videos of a baseball pitcher display-
ing dominant, submissive, and neutral NVBs to show that this effect is mainly dri-
ven by the submissive condition. No difference between the neutral and the domi-
nant condition was evident, suggesting that it is more important to avoid displaying
submissive NVB instead of showing dominant NVB as neutral NVB already seems
to lead to the impression that the athlete can handle the situation. The results show
that NVBs expressing dominance and submissiveness are important early cues that
affect the impression formation process in sport and the expectancy of success of the
athlete observing this NVB. In addition, the results indicate, that further informa-
tion about the ability level of the athlete might diminish this effect. Performance
consequences of the effect of NVB are discussed.
KEY WORDS: Nonverbal behavior, Person perception, Body language, Self-effi-
cacy, Evolutionary psychology.
Charles Darwin proposed that many behaviors exhibited by animals are
demonstrative of evolved adaptations that allow the nonverbal expression of
emotions (Darwin, 1872/2009). In the recent past, Darwin’s proposal has
inspired the theoretical framework, referred to as the “basic emotion”
approach (cf. Barrett, 2011). According to the basic emotion view, certain
physiological changes underlie the nonverbal expression of a person’s emo-
tional state (e.g., fear). A further important tenet of the basic emotion
approach is that humans are born with the ability to perceive the emotions
expressed by another person. Although there is current debate on the topic
Correspondence to: Philip Furley, German Sport University, Cologne. Institute of Cogni-
tive and Team/Racket Sport Research, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Köln, Germany or
email (p.furley@dshs-koeln.de).
Int. J. Sport Psychol., 2012; 43: 294-311

of whether emotional nonverbal expressions are innate and universally rec-
ognized (e.g., see Barrett, 2011; Shariff & Tracy, 2011), the underlying view
has been absorbed into other fields of research in psychology.
To date, research in the sports science domain has been broadly aligned
with the basic emotion view. Research evidence indicates that the nonverbal
expressions of emotions are detected by observers who then expect certain
behaviors from an opponent (e.g., Greenlees, Bradley, Holder, & Thelwell,
2005). For example, research by Furley and colleagues (Furley, Dicks, &
Memmert, 2012a) demonstrates that football players displaying dominant
nonverbal behavior (NVB) prior to penalty kick execution are believed to
possess more favorable performance characteristics such as confidence and
assertiveness, by opposing goalkeepers in comparison with football players
showing submissive NVB. Furthermore, the opposing goalkeepers expected
to perform less well against penalty takers displaying dominant NVB. In line
with this finding, Furley and colleagues reported that results from an Implicit
Association Test (IAT, Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) indicated
that dominant NVB is implicitly associated with a positive athlete schema,
whereas submissive NVB is implicitly associated with a negative athlete
schema (e.g. Fiske & Taylor, 1991; Furley et al., 2012a).
NVB and schema driven person perception. Further to the basic emo-
tion view, current sport person perception research has largely drawn upon
schema driven explanations of social cognition, which propose that people
use information (e.g., NVB) from early instances of social interaction to clas-
sify a person into a certain category or person schema (Fiske & Taylor, 1991).
Person schemas are defined as an individual’s knowledge of attributes of a
specific type of person and the relationships among these attributes. Social
psychologists have amassed a large body of evidence, which is purported to
indicate that social knowledge is utilized during the natural course of per-
ception (for a review, see Ferguson & Bargh, 2004). Such expectations are
believed to shape and influence a perceiver’s impressions, judgments, feel-
ings, and behavior in relation to others (e.g. Bargh & Chartrand, 1999).
Taken together, schema and basic emotion accounts of person percep-
tion (Darwin, 1872/2009; Fiske & Taylor, 1991), offer a potential theoretical
framework for studying NVB in sporting situations. For example, this uni-
fied framework offers an explanation of why previous person perception
research in sport has demonstrated that athletes’ impressions are substan-
tially influenced by the observation of NVBs reflecting dominance and sub-
missiveness (Furley et al., 2012a; Greenlees et al., 2008). In line with basic
emotion accounts, submissive NVB information may communicate one’s
acknowledgment of inferiority to the stronger opponent and thereby the
295

avoidance of potential life threatening attacks (de Waal, 1998). As consid-
ered above, such hereditary predisposition implies that humans communi-
cate and interpret nonverbal expressions of dominance and submissiveness
as a way of determining status (Mehta, Jones, & Josephs, 2008). In his prin-
ciple of Antithesis Darwin (1872/2009) states that differences between non-
verbal emotional expressions emerged due to exaggeration in order to dis-
tinctively differentiate between emotions of opposite functioning, such as
dominance and submissiveness. Dominance is expressed by an expansive
body posture (e.g., widespread limbs and enlargement of occupied space by
spreading out) whereas submissive NVB is expressed by a contractive pos-
ture (limbs touching the torso) and minimization of occupied space by col-
lapsing the body inward (Carney, Hall, & Smith LeBeau, 2005; Hall, Coats,
& Smith LeBeau, 2005; Gifford, 1991).
The Present Research
The rationale of the present study was twofold. First and most impor-
tantly, research on the nonverbal expression of emotion has largely ignored
neutral expression and mainly focused on dichotomous comparisons such as
dominant vs. submissive NVB (Hareli, Shomrat, & Hess, 2009). Hareli and
co-workers proposed that the pattern of results when comparing dominant
vs. submissive NVBs is mostly driven by submissive NVB, with submissive
NVB being responsible for more negative impressions rather than dominant
NVB being responsible for more positive impressions. Neutral emotional
expressions are believed to be powerful in their own right, as they may reflect
relaxation, competence and mastery of the situation (Warner & Shields,
2007). Moreover, showing an emotional reaction to an event could some-
times be considered a weakness (Kopelman, Rosette, & Thompson, 2006).
Evidence for this assumption was provided by Lewis (2000) who reported
that managers in an organizational setting were perceived as being more
competent if they reacted neutrally when receiving bad news. Thus, it seems
that behaving neutrally within a situation leads to the impression that the
person can handle the situation. To date, the importance of including a neu-
tral emotional expression when investigating dominant and submissive NVB
has only been demonstrated for facial expressions, while previous research
focusing on body information associated with dominance and submissive-
ness has only focused on dichotomous comparisons.
The second question we attempted to address in the present study was
whether NVB affects the impression formation process when observers view
296

the NVB during performance preparation in tandem with the observed ath-
lete’s action. This comparison has not been made in the literature on the
effects of NVB on impression formation in the field of sport. Recently, Free-
man and Ambady (2011) have advanced the person perception approach of
Fiske and Taylor (1991) by proposing that the process of person construal is
dynamic and evolves over time. Freeman and Ambady suggested that fol-
lowing the observation of another person, certain categories or schemas are
activated, which then dynamically evolve over time before they stabilize
(Freeman & Ambady, 2009; Freeman, Pauker, Apfelbaum, & Ambady, 2010;
Kunda, Davies, Adams, & Spencer, 2002). Thus, it was proposed that our
impressions of others during the person perception process vary as a func-
tion of time, as a certain category can be activated to different degrees (e.g.,
0% activation or 100% activation) according to the information that is
extracted at a given time (Dale, Kehoe, & Spivey, 2007; Freeman, Ambady,
Rule, & Johnson, 2008). In this respect, Freeman and Ambady (2011, p. 249)
argued “that person construal involves alternative, competing categories that
are simultaneously and partially active, and these evolve over time until sta-
bilizing onto ultimate construal”.
In consideration of the temporal dynamics of person construal argumen-
tation, in the current study we consider whether the NVB effect on impres-
sion formation might be altered if observers obtain further information when
viewing opponent’s executing baseball pitches. Although, Buscombe and
colleagues (Buscombe, Greenlees, Thelwell, Holder & Rimmer, 2006) previ-
ously examined the effect of body language and clothing on expectancies of
success following the initial observation of the warm-up and subsequent
video footage of the target player performing, these authors did not investi-
gate whether the effect of NVB on impression formation differed when
analysed in isolation or when followed by further performance relevant
information. In order to address this issue, we consider whether watching the
target player follow through with the execution of the baseball pitch influ-
ences the impression formation of observers. Presentation of the complete
throw kinematics of the baseball pitch will provide observers with informa-
tion concerning the pitching skill of the target, which may be most critical
during the impression formation process. In this respect, we attempted to
ascertain whether the hypothesized NVB effect is observable to a similar
degree when baseball players have additional information about the skill
level of the opponent.
To address the aforementioned shortcomings in the literature on NVB
and impression formation in sporting contexts, we created point-light videos
(Johansson, 1973) of baseball pitchers warming up, which allowed us to
297

298
solely manipulate kinematic information pertaining to dominant, submissive,
and neutral NVBs, whilst keeping surface features (clothing, hair style, facial
features, attire) constant. The point-light technique is ideally suited to inves-
tigate the effects of NVBs on impression formation (see Furley et al., 2012a).
In this regard, it has been suggested that the pick-up of kinematic informa-
tion may have evolved for fitness reasons in social animals in order to effi-
ciently communicate emotional information with one another (Bente,
Leuschner, Al Issa, & Blascovich, 2010; Blakemore & Decety, 2001). In line
with this argument, previous research indicates that accurate person percep-
tion judgments are predicated on the information specified by the movement
kinematics of the observed actor (Runeson & Frykholm, 1983).
Before actually pitching in the game, baseball pitchers usually warm up
by throwing in the bullpen, which is a special area where relief pitchers prac-
tice before entering a game. The sport of baseball is therefore a highly suit-
able scenario as there are specific instances when teammates observe the
opposing pitcher warming up. During this warming up period, the opposing
team is likely to form an impression of the pitcher. Specifically, previous work
on person perception in the domain of sports has demonstrated that preper-
formance NVB during the warm up has a major impact on an athlete’s
impression formation, which in turn, influences the expected performance
outcome (Greenlees, et al., 2005; Greenlees et al., 2008).
Based on the theoretical considerations outlined above, we hypothesized
that the expression of submissive NVB would lead to more negative impres-
sion formation and outcome expectation among baseball players compared
to both neutral and dominant NVBs. We did not expect to find that the dom-
inant NVB would lead to more positive expressions and outcome expecta-
tions compared to neutral NVB. Furthermore, we expected that the effect of
NVB on impression formation and outcome expectation would be dimin-
ished if observers had further information about the pitching ability of the
target as participants had more relevant information available on which they
could base their impressions on.
EXPERIMENT
Method
PARTICIPANTS
Male baseball players (n = 40; M= 27.5; SD = 2.9) took part in the study, who had been
playing for an average of 9 years at an amateur level in Germany. Neither age, nor playing

299
level, nor years of playing experience significantly moderated the results. Informed consent
was obtained from every participant before commencing the experiment. The study was car-
ried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975.
STIMULI
The filming took place at night on a regular baseball field in order to eliminate almost all
ambient light. We used a third person, side-on filming perspective so as to depict the per-
spective baseball players have when observing an opposing pitcher warming up in the bullpen
(see figure 1). All footage was filmed with a Canon HG21 digital video camera mounted on a
tripod, placed 8 m from the pitcher at a height of 1.85 m. Two halogen spotlights, mounted on
a tripod, were positioned in front of the camera directed at the actor.
We recruited 4 actors who all wore black tight fitting clothes and headwear. Reflective
tape was placed on the clothes (cf. figure 1) following the procedure of Atkinson, Dittrich,
Gemmell, and Young (2004). We placed 2-cm-wide stripes of reflective tape around each
Fig. 1. - Single frame of a sample pointlight stimuli of a player showing a neutral
body language used in Experiment 1.

300
ankle, knee, elbow, shoulder, hip and hand. Furthermore, we placed one strip as a headband
around the head. The ankle, knee, elbow, and hand tapes completely encircled the limb. The
reason we choose strips over points of light was that these are better visible from different
angles and thereby allow the actors more freedom of movement without the reflection disap-
pearing when creating the point-light videos (Atkinson et al., 2004).
NVB manipulation
All of the actors received the same instructions on how to prepare the pitch and were
asked to carry out two different versions of a pitch: a wind up pitch and a set pitch. This com-
bination ensures that the player is visible both from the side and from the front and therefore
allows full visibility of the NVB displayed by the respective pitcher. The set and the wind-up
conditions are the two legal pitching actions in baseball (Footnote). The wind-up is character-
ized by a slower prepitch movement, during which, the pitcher is visible both from the frontal
and side perspective. The set position is characterized by a faster prepitch execution , during
which, the pitcher is only visible from a side-on perspective. Our experimental manipulation
involved the NVB of the baseball players before they enter the game and was derived from the
experimental manipulations used by Greenlees et al (2005) and Carney et al. (2005). During the
follow through of the pitch execution, the actors were instructed to behave as per their stan-
dard warm-up. In the positive, dominant NVB condition, the actors were asked to (i) stand and
walk with an erect posture, which involved pulling the shoulders back and pushing the chest
out; (ii) slightly spread the limbs from the torso in order to occupy more space; (iii) hold the
head up with the chin parallel to the ground so that their eyes were looking directly at the cam-
era; and (iv) to look directly at the camera for 90% of the time. For the submissive NVB con-
dition, the actors were asked to (i) adopt a slouched posture with the head and chin pointing
down; (ii) limbs touching the torso and thereby minimizing the occupied space by collapsing
the body inwards; (iii) shoulders hanging to the front; and (iv) the eyes looking down for 90%
of time and only briefly glancing at the goal-keeper/camera. In the neutral condition we asked
participants to show the NVB they adopt when they casually warm up. Specifically, the neutral
NVB condition involved the actors to (i) adopt a relaxed stance with the feet shoulder-width
apart and the shoulders casually hanging; (ii) neither collapse the limbs inward or outward (iii)
not to deliberately hold the head up and the chin slightly pointed towards the ground; (iv) to
gaze in the direction of the opposing hitter for approximately 50% of the time.
Every actor was filmed six times in the three different NVB conditions, three times for
every NVB in the windup condition and three times for every NVB in the set condition. Two
independent raters selected those videos that were — except for the experimental manipula-
tion — most similar to one another. The raters evaluated the footage from the three experi-
mental conditions across three seven point Likert scales-ranging from not at all dominant (1)
to highly dominant (7); not at all submissive (1) to highly submissive (7); and not at all neutral
(1) to highly neutral (7). The evaluations of the raters in the dominant and submissive condi-
tions are comparable to those reported in previous research (Furley et al., 2012a): dominant
condition (dominant scale M= 5.8; submissive scale M= 0.6; neutral scale M= 2.6); submis-
sive condition ( dominant scale M= 0.4; submissive scale M= 5.6; neutral scale M= 1.6); and
(Footnote) Without going into exact detail of the respective pitching positions we only detail
the important differences between them for the study. More detailed descriptions of the respective
pitching positions can be obtained in Dun, Kingsley, Fleisig, Loftice, and Andrews (2007).

neutral condition (dominant scale M= 3.9; submissive scale M= 2.3; neutral scale M= 4.9).
The procedure to evaluate the experimental footage ensured that the 24 videos — four actors
filmed in 3 different NVB conditions and the 2 pitch conditions (windup and set) — used as
the experimental stimuli only significantly differed due to the experimental manipulation. As
the data set obtained showed almost the exact same pattern of results for the windup and the
set pitches, we did not treat this as an experimental factor.
Available information manipulation.
The second experimental factor was varied between subjects and involved the length of
the point light videos. In the short condition, participants viewed the preparation of the pitch
and the video stopped three frames before the ball was released. In the long condition, par-
ticipants viewed the exact same videos, only this time the whole pitch was visible.
MEASURES
Following previous sport person perception research (e.g., Greenlees, et al., 2008;
Greenlees, 2006; Greenlees et al., 2005), participants rated the player on several 11 point dig-
ital semantic differential scales after every video. In order to give their ratings, participants
moved a mouse cursor from the middle of the scale towards either pole of the scale and log in
their rating by clicking the left mouse button. The software transformed the ratings into a
value (with 3 decimals) between 0 reflecting the left pole of the scale and 1 reflecting the right
pole of the scale. The utilized scales were continuous, ranging from 0.000 to 1.000 and were
visually presented as 11 points in order to assist participants in providing a clear indication of
their ratings. All of the following measures were adapted computerized versions of measures
used in previous literature (Furley et al., 2012a; Greenslees et al., 2008).
Perception of target player
The first seven items were taken as measures concerning the perceived impressions
towards the target baseball pitcher. The dimensions were: assertive – not assertive; competi-
tive – non-competitive; and experienced – novice; confident – unconfident; composed – on
edge; focused – not focused; and relaxed – tense. Scores for each scale were summed to give a
measure of the impression formed to the target player (from 0 to 7) with low scores indicating
less positive impressions.
Quality of pitch
We asked participants to rate the quality of the pitch (or expected quality of the pitch in
the short condition) along the dimensions very low quality – very high quality with low scores
reflecting low quality pitches. The scores potentially ranged from 0 to 1.
Speed of pitch. We asked participants to rate the speed (or expected speed of the pitch in
the short condition) along the dimensions very slow – very fast with low scores reflecting slow
pitches. The scores potentially ranged from 0 to 1.
301

Outcome expectancy
The last three items assessed how sure participants were that one out of three; two out of
three; and three out of three pitches would be a strike (a pitch within the strike zone that they
did not hit or a pitch within the strike zone that they did not swing at). Furthermore, a fourth
item assessed how sure the observers were that they would be struck out by that pitch. A
strikeout in baseball occurs after a batter has three strikes. All of these scales have an element
of expected performance of the opponent — a pitch within a specified zone around the bat-
ter-and an element of confidence of the participant — “will I be able to hit the ball”. We there-
fore consider it appropriate to combine these four scales to one outcome expectancy measure,
which was computed from the four items — every single score was multiplied by the amount
of expected strikes in the question and added together at the end. The last item assessing the
likelihood of a strikeout was therefore also multiplied by three. This was done so that a higher
certainty of three strikes would have a greater weight than one strike — reflecting the outcome
expectations of the participants (based on the recommendations of Greenlees et. al. 2007;
Feltz & Chase, 1998 for the measurement of competitive expectancies). The scores potentially
ranged from 0.000-9.000. Hence, if a participant rated the likelihood of one strike out of three
as 0.9, the likelihood of two strikes out of three as 0.7, the likelihood of three strikes out of
three as 0.4, and finally the likelihood of being struck out was 0.5. The equation for the calcu-
lation of such outcome expectancy score is as follows: (0.9*1)+(0.7*2)+(0.4*3)+(0.5*3)=5.
PROCEDURE
Participants were instructed that they had to rate baseball players solely on the kinematic
information that was presented to them in the point light displays. Before commencing the
experiment, participants filled out a questionnaire gathering demographic data. Every partic-
ipant was tested individually on a standard 17 inch notebook. E-prime 2.0 professional (Psy-
chological software tools, 2007) was used to present the stimuli and collect the judgments on
a 19 inch computer screen placed 60 cm away from the subjects. Every participant viewed all
of the 24 videos in random order. Participants first performed two practice trials to familiar-
ize themselves with the procedure. After this, the 24 clips were presented in a random order
and participants had to give their ratings by clicking the left mouse button on the various
scales described above. After completing the testing procedure, participants were informed
about the purpose of the experiment.
DATA ANALYSIS
We calculated a mixed design MANOVA with repeated measures on the within subject
independent variable NVB (dominant, neutral, and submissive) and the between subject inde-
pendent variable video length (short vs. long) in which the separate dependant variables were
treated as a general index of the overall impression formed of the target player. We followed
up the MANOVA with a series of equivalent univariate ANOVAs to examine the effect on the
single dependant variables of player perception, outcome expectation, perceived pitching
quality and speed (cf. Greenlees et al., 2008). Where the assumption of sphericity was vio-
lated, the p-values were computed using the conservative Greenhouse-Geisser method with
302

303
corrected degrees of freedom. Furthermore, to assess the effects of the separate items of the
perception of target player scale, we calculated an additional MANOVA with repeated mea-
sures on the within subject independent variable NVB (dominant, neutral, and submissive) on
the individual perception of target player dependant variables.
Results
The cronbach alpha coefficient for the person perception scale was more
than satisfactory (α=.93). The descriptive statistics are summarized in Table
II. The 3 (dominant, neutral, and submissive) x 2 (short vs. long) MANOVA
using Pillai’s trace revealed a significant main effect of NVB on overall impres-
sion formation (V= .408; F(8, 31) = 2.671, p= .023,
η
² = .408) demonstrating
that the preperformance NVB had an impact on the participant’s ratings. Fur-
ther, a significant main effect of video length was evident on overall impres-
sion formation (V= .265; F(4, 35) = 3.149, p= .026,
η
² = .265), indicating that
participants formed more positive impressions of the baseball players when
they only watched them prepare the pitch and not actually carry it out. The
interaction between NVB and video length failed to reach significance (V=
.308; F(8, 31) = 1.724, p= .132,
η
² = .308), indicating that the effect of NVB
were maintained, even when participants viewed the whole of the pitching
action, although there was a trend towards a more pronounced effect of NVB
when participants did not view the whole pitching action.
Follow-up ANOVA on perception of the target player revealed a main
effect of NVB (F(1.676, 63.702) = 7.736, p= .001,
η
² = .169). Bonferroni cor-
rected pairwise comparisons revealed that this main effect was driven by the
submissive NVB condition which significantly differed from both the neutral
and dominant condition (p = .011). There was no difference between the
dominant and the neutral condition (p= 1). No significant main effect was
TABLE I
Players’s Mean Ratings Of Pitchers As A Function Of Body Language And Video Length
Condition
dominant body neutral body submissive body
language language language
<–long short–> <–long short–> <–long short–>
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Perception of target 4.13 .68 4.14 .66 3.89 .61 4.40 .77 3.75 .56 3.81 .54
Outcome expectancy 4.95 1.2 4.75 1.3 4.75 .96 5.08 1.3 4.30 .79 4.46 1.27
Pitch quality .60 .15 .61 .02 .61 .16 .59 .16 .63 .13 .61 .15
Pitch speed .56 .11 .61 .08 .52 .09 .62 .11 .48 .08 .57 .11

304
evident for the between subject factor video length (p= .235). The interac-
tion between NVB and video length was significant (F(1.676, 63.702) =
3.337, p= .05, η² = .081), indicating that the effect of NVB was stronger
when participants only saw the athlete prepare the pitch instead of actually
carrying it out. Bonferroni corrected pairwise comparisons revealed signifi-
cant differences in the short video condition between the submissive and
both the neutral (p= .005) and dominant condition (p = .032), but not
between the dominant and neutral condition (p= .105). No significant dif-
ferences were evident in the long video condition (submissive/neutral p= 1;
submissive/dominant p= .21; dominant/neutral p= .128). Table 2 summa-
rizes the individual effects of the NVB manipulation on the player rating
scales. MANOVA using Pillai’s trace on the individual perception of target
player items revealed a significant main effect of NVB on overall impression
formation (V= .476; F(14, 26) = 3.377, p= .004,
η
² = .645). Results in Table
2 indicate that this effect was driven by the scales: assertive – not assertive;
confident – unconfident; composed – on edge; and relaxed – tense.
The ANOVA on the expected pitching success of the player revealed a
main effect of NVB (F(2, 76) = 8.463, p= .001,
η
² = .182). Bonferroni cor-
rected pairwise comparisons demonstrated that this main effect was driven
by the submissive NVB condition differing significantly from both the neu-
tral (p = .004) and dominant condition (p = .007). No other main effects or
interactions reached significance. No main effects or interactions were evi-
dent on the expected quality of the pitch. However, the follow up ANOVA
on expected speed of the pitch revealed a main effect for NVB (F(1.715,
65.184) = 5.461, p = .009, η² = .126). This effect was driven by the submis-
sive condition. Bonferroni corrected pairwise comparisons only revealed a
significant difference between the submissive NVB condition and dominant
condition (p = .009), whereas the difference to the neutral condition only
approached significance (p = .125). Furthermore, only the between subject
TABLE II
Univariate Analysis For The Main Effects Of NVB On The Individual “Perception Of Target Player”
Dependant Variables
Item M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) df F
η
²p
dominant neutral submissive (model, error)
assertive – not assertive .59 (.09) .59 (.09) .56 (.08) 1.689, 65.881 5.353 0.121 .010
competitive – non-competitive .60 (.09) .59 (.10) .57 (.09) 2, 78 1.741 0.043 .182
experienced – novice .57 (.09) .57 (.09) .55 (.08) 2, 78 1.199 0.030 .307
confident – unconfident .62 (.10) .60 (.09) .57 (.10) 1.520, 59.284 4.110 0.095 .031
composed – on edge .52 (.10) .56 (.09) .53 (.10) 2, 78 4.401 0.101 .015
focused – not focused .62 (.10) .60 (.09) .57 (.10) 1.678, 65.442 1.020 0.025 .365
relaxed – tense .51 (.10) .55 (.09) .53 (.10) 2, 78 4.028 0.094 .022

main effect of video length was significant (F(1, 38) = 12.650, p = .001, η² =
.250), indicating that subjects expected the speed of the pitch to be higher
when they only saw the player preparing the pitch compared to following
through with the pitch. This univariate effect therefore seems to be the sole
reason for the significant effect in the initial MANOVA.
Discussion
The aim of the study was to advance previous person perception work in
the field of sport by including a neutral NVB condition as most research on
the nonverbal expression of emotion has largely ignored neutral expression
and mainly focused on dichotomous comparisons such as dominant vs. sub-
missive NVB (Hareli, Shomrat, & Hess, 2009). Secondly we attempted to
address a further shortcoming in the person perception literature in sports by
investigating whether NVB affects the impression formation process simi-
larly when observers view the NVB during performance preparation in tan-
dem with the observed athlete’s action.
We were able to replicate previous results on the effects of NVB signal-
ing dominance and submissiveness on impression formation and outcome
expectation in the sport of baseball. The results of the present study are in
line with evolutionary accounts of dominant and submissive NVBs and sug-
gest that these influence the impressions and the expected success of oppo-
nents competing against athletes displaying these NVBs. The most interest-
ing and unique finding of the present study was that the effect on impression
formation was largely driven by submissive NVB as only this condition dif-
fered significantly from the neutral and the dominant conditions. The domi-
nant and neutral NVB conditions led to similar impression formation and
outcome expectancy scores. In this respect, acting in a neutral manner while
preparing a baseball pitch might be perceived as a sign of relaxedness, com-
petence and mastery of the situation (Warner & Shields, 2007). From a prac-
tical perspective, it therefore seems more important to avoid displaying sub-
missive NVB instead of showing a dominant NVB as a neutral NVB already
seems to lead to the impression that the athlete can handle the situation.
Results of the multivariate analysis did not reveal a significant interaction
for NVB and video length on overall ratings. We only found tentative sup-
port for our prediction that NVB would have a greater effect on impression
formation when participants had less information (short condition) about
the quality of the actual pitch compared to a condition in which participants
viewed both the preparation and follow through of the baseball pitch. Only
305

the univariate analysis on the person perception scale showed this significant
interaction but did not generalize to the expected outcome measures. Thus,
the NVBs of athletes seem to have an impact, if participants have additional
information about the pitching ability of the opponent. However, the results
do indicate that the effect of NVB on the impressions formed of the athlete
is not as pronounced when participants view the actual pitching action of the
athlete as shown by the significant univariate interaction between NVB and
video length on the person perception scale. This might be interpreted as
indicative of the assumption that further important information about the
pitching ability of the athlete modifies the initial athlete schema that is acti-
vated.
The interpretation outlined above follows Freeman and Ambady’s
(2011) temporal dynamics argumentation of person construal, which pro-
poses that certain expectations of an opponent dynamically evolve over time
before they stabilize (Freeman & Ambady, 2009; Freeman, Pauker, Apfel-
baum, & Ambady, 2010; Kunda, Davies, Adams, & Spencer, 2002). Previous
research suggests that preperformance NVBs activate certain athlete
schemas, affecting impression formation and expected performance of
opposing athletes (Furley et al., 2012a). Taking this into consideration with
the present results, it appears that NVBs activate a certain athlete schema at
an early stage in the impression formation process. The initial impression is
then likely to be integrated with further information later on in the impres-
sion formation process “until stabilizing onto [the] ultimate construal”
(Freeman & Ambady, 2011, p. 249). In this respect, impression formation
in the field of sport may be best understood as a gradual time-dependant
transition between different person schemas as people exploit information
across different timescales. For example, an athlete may already have an ini-
tial expectation of an opponent based on pre-game analysis, which may alter
when observing the same opponent displaying dominant or neutral NVBs
during the warm up. This may then lead the athlete to believe that the oppo-
nent is likely to be highly skilled and the chances of performing successfully
against him are not very high. In consideration of the present results, we sug-
gest that NVB may act as an important information source that is readily
interpreted by opponents (especially, if limited further information is avail-
able about the athlete), as the person perception process in sport is usually
highly time constrained.
Although the results may be interpreted in this manner, it is important to
acknowledge that the present design made sure that no other information
could be integrated and therefore the NVB effect might have been exagger-
ated compared to the actual effects of NVB in the field. As considered, dur-
306

ing sport competitions, the impression formation process is likely to be
affected by multiple interacting factors including previous knowledge of the
opponent’s ability level and additional information gathered during the
warm-up or at different instances of a competition. Pertinent to the present
results, Kahneman (2011) argues that people in general do not acknowledge
that they might be missing important information when forming impressions
of other people. Instead, they tend to treat the limited information available
as if it where all there is to know which Kahneman explains with reference to
his WYSIATI (“What you see is all there is”) rule. Rather than drawing upon
or seeking further information before forming an impression of another per-
son, Kahneman proposed that “You build the best possible story from the
information available to you, and if it is a good story, you believe it. […] Our
comforting conviction that the world makes sense rests on a secure founda-
tion: our almost unlimited ability to ignore our ignorance” (Kahneman,
2011, p. 201). Following this line of argument, it would appear that the par-
ticipants in the experiment formed an impression solely on the basis of the
NVB in the short video condition as there was hardly any other information
available. Therefore, rather than acknowledging their ignorance in the exper-
iment, participants build up a story that made sense based on highly limited
information. When they had slightly more information available in the long
video condition, then the effect of NVB on impression formation was not as
pronounced. Hence, it is important to acknowledge that the present study
was conducted in an artificial laboratory situation with substantial differ-
ences to the demands of competitive sports as athletes usually have a lot more
information to integrate and therefore it is likely that NVB has a smaller
effect in the field, which is tentatively supported by the comparison of the
short and long videos. Therefore, future research on NVB in sports has to
advance to more representative sport performance context and for example
start to investigate how NVB based impression formation influences behav-
ior (see Furley, Dicks, Stendtke, & Memmert, 2012b).
Nevertheless, research suggests that preperformance NVB influences
first impressions even when further performance relevant information is pre-
sented (Buscombe et al., 2006). Following suggestions of the evolutionary
significance of dominant and submissive behaviors (Mehta et al., 2008), the
present results clearly show that athletes are well advised to avoid the display
of submissive NVB. Recent research linking performance and NVB suggests
that following competitive success, participants display dominant NVB,
which coincides with an increase in testosterone levels and a decrease in cor-
tisol (Mazur & Booth, 1998; Mehta & Josephs, 2010; Mehta et al., 2008). In
contrast, losing in competition has the opposite effects (Mehta et al., 2008).
307

That is, decreases in testosterone levels and increases in cortisol level, coin-
ciding with the display of submissive NVB (Archer, 2006). When athletes are
losing in a prolonged competition, potentially leading to the display of sub-
missive NVB, then the present results suggest that this in turn leads to
enhanced confidence of the opponent, which is likely to result in further per-
formance advantages for the opponent. As we did not assess actual sporting
performance, the implications of the present study on sporting performance
are not clear and future research should address this limitation. In this
regard, Furley et al. (2012b) who demonstrated that goalkeepers adapt their
penalty saving strategy by initiating their movement later as a consequence of
observing NVB during the penalty preparation that signals high levels of
anxiety. Nevertheless, in consideration of previous work, it is plausible that
the pattern of results obtained here might have considerable influence on an
athlete’s performance in sport. For example, the observation of specific
NVBs such as dominance or submissiveness may, in turn, influence the per-
ceived competence of the batter in successfully competing against the
pitcher, and thus influence their performance since evidence from self-effi-
cacy theory (Bandura, 2001 for a recent review) demonstrates that outcome
expectancy beliefs can potentially influence performance in sport settings
(Feltz, Short, & Sullivan, 2008). In support of this argumentation, a recent
study by Damisch, Stoberock, and Mussweiler (2010) demonstrated that
self-efficacy beliefs can even turn seemingly irrational beliefs — superstitious
talisman — into observable performance benefits in a golf putting task by
increasing people’s beliefs in their abilities.
In conclusion, the present study adds to the growing body of research on
person perception in sport by demonstrating that the NVB affects on impres-
sion formation using dichotomous NVB manipulations —positive vs. nega-
tive or dominant vs. submissive —are mainly driven by the negative or sub-
missive conditions as the additional neutral condition was almost the same as
the dominant condition. In addition, we provided first tentative evidence
that additional performance related information decreases the affect of NVB
on impression formation. It is our hope that future research on person per-
ception in sport builds on this first observation.
Acknowledgements
Special thanks go to Mehmet Aklan for helping with the data collection in this study. The
contributions from the second author were made while he was supported by a grant (number
446-10-128) from the NWO ‘Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research’.
308

REFERENCES
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypoth-
esis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 319-345.
Atkinson, A. P., Dittrich, W. H., Gemmel, A. J., & Young, A. W. (2004). Emotion perception
from dynamic and static body expressions in point-light and full-light displays. Percep-
tion, 33, 717-746.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psy-
chology, 52, 1-26.
Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psy-
chologist, 54, 462-479.
Barrett, L. F. (2011). Was Darwin wrong about emotional expression? Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 20, 400-406.
Bente, G., Leuschner, H., Al Issa, A., and Blascovich, J. (2010). The others: Universals and
cultural specificities in the perception of status and dominance from nonverbal behavior.
Consciousness and Cognition 19, 762-777.
Berman, J. S., & Kenny, D. A. (1976). Correlational bias in observer ratings. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 34, 263-273.
Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1974). Physical attractiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances
in experimental social psychology (Vol. 7). New York: Academic Press.
Blakemore, S.J., & Decety, J. (2001). From the perception of action to the understanding of
intention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 561-566.
Buscombe, R., Greenlees, I., Thelwell, R., Holder, T., & Rimmer, M. (2006) Expectancy
effects in Tennis: The impact of pre-match non-verbal behaviour. Journal of Sport Sci-
ences, 24, 1265-1272.
Carney, D., Cuddy, A., & Yap, A. (2010). Power Posing: Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neu-
roendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance. Psychological Science, 21, 1363-1368.
Carney, D.R., Hall, J.A., & Smith LeBeau, L. (2005). Beliefs about the nonverbal expression
of social power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29, 105-123.
Dale, R., Kehoe, C., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Graded motor responses in the time course of cat-
egorizing atypical exemplars. Memory & Cognition, 35, 15-28.
Damisch, L., Stoberock, B., & Mussweiler, T. (2010). Keep your fingers crossed!: How super-
stition improves performance. Psychological Science, 21, 1014-1020.
Darwin, C. (2009). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. New York, NY:
Oxford. (Original work published 1872)
de Waal, F. (1998). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290.
Dun, S., Kingsley, D., Fleisig, G. S., Loftice, J., & Andrews, J. R. (2007). Biomechanical Com-
parison of the Fastball From Wind-Up and the Fastball From Stretch in Professional
Baseball Pitchers. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 36, 137-141
Feltz, D. L., Short, S. E., & Sullivan, P. J. (2008). Self-efficacy in sport. Champaign, IL:Human
Kinetics.
Ferguson, M. J., & Bargh, J. A. (2004). How social perception can automatically influence
behavior. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 33-39.
Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-
based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention
309

and interpretation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(Vol. 23, pp. 1-74). New York: Academic Press.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2009). Motions of the hand expose the partial and parallel acti-
vation of stereotypes. Psychological Science, 20, 1183-1188.
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psy-
chological Review, 118, 247-279.
Freeman, J. B., Ambady, N., Rule, N. O., & Johnson, K. L. (2008). Will a category cue attract
you? Motor output reveals dynamic competition across person construal. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 673-690.
Freeman, J. B., Pauker, K., Apfelbaum, E. P., & Ambady, N. (2010). Continuous dynamics in
the real-time perception of race. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 179-185.
Feltz, D. L., & Chase, M. A. (1998). The measurement of selfefficacy and confidence in sport.
In J. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 65-80).
Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Furley, P.,Dicks, M., & Memmert, D. (2012a). Nonverbal Behavior in Soccer: The Influence of
Dominant and Submissive Body Language on the Impression Formation and Expectancy
of Success of Soccer Players. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 34, 61-82.
Furley, P., Dicks, M., Stendtke, F., & Memmert, D. (2012b). “Get it out the way. The wait’s
killing me.” Hastening and hiding during soccer penalty kicks. Psychology of Sport &
Exercise, 13, 454-465.
Gifford, R. (1991). Mapping non-verbal behavior on the interpersonal circle. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 61, 279–288.
Greenlees, I. A. (2007). Person perception in sport. In S. Jowett & D. Lavallee (Eds.), Social
psychology of sport (pp. 195-208). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Greenlees, I. A., Bradley, A., Thelwell, R. C., & Holder, T. P. (2005). The impact of two forms
of opponents’ non-verbal communication on impression formation and outcome expec-
tations. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6, 103-115.
Greenlees, I. A., Leyland, A., Thelwell, R. C., & Filby, W. (2008). Soccer penalty takers’ uni-
form colour and pre-penalty kick gaze affect the impressions formed of them by oppos-
ing goalkeepers. Journal of Sports Sciences, 26, 569–576.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998).Measuring individual differ-
ences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74, 1464-1480.
Hall, J.A., Coats, E.J., & Smith LeBeau, L. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and the vertical
dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 898-924.
Hareli, S., Shomrat, N., & Hess, U. (2009). Emotional Versus Neutral Expressions and Per-
ceptions of Social Dominance and Submissiveness. Emotion, 9, 378-384.
Johansson, G. (1973). Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis. Per-
ception & Psychophysics, 14, 195-204.
Jones, E. E., Rock, L., Shaver, K. G., Goethals, G. R., & Ward, L. M. (1968). Pattern of per-
formance and ability attribution: An unexpected primacy effect. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 10, 317-340.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. Lonond, UK: Penguin books.
Kopelman, S., Rosette, A., & Thompson, L. (2006). The three faces of eve: Strategic displays
of positive neutral and negative emotions in negotiations. Organization Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 99, 81-101.
310

311
Kunda, Z., Davies, P. G., Adams, B. D., & Spencer, S. J. (2002). The dynamic time course of
stereotype activation: Activation, dissipation, and resurrection. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 82, 283-299.
Lampel, A. K., & Anderson, N. H. (1968). Combining visual and verbal information in an
impression formation task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1-6.
Lewis, K. M. (2000). When leaders display emotion: How followers respond to negative emo-
tional expression of male and female leaders. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 221-
234.
Mazur, A., & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men. Behavioral & Brain Sci-
ences, 21, 353-397.
Mehta, P. H., & Josephs, R. A (2010). Testosterone and cortisol jointly regulate dominance:
Evidence for a dual-hormone hypothesis. Hormones and Behavior, 58, 898-906.
Mehta, P. H., Jones, A. C., & Josephs, R. A. (2008). The social endocrinology of dominance:
Basal testosterone predicts cortisol changes and behavior following victory and defeat.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 1078-1093.
Miller, A. G. (1970). Role of physical attractiveness in impression formation. Psychomomic Sci-
ence, 19, 241-243.
Psychology Software Tools. (2007). E-Prime (Version 2.0) [Computer software]. Pittsburgh,
PA: Author.
Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1983). Kinematic specification of dynamics as an informational
basis for person-and-action perception: expectation, gender recognition, and deceptive
information. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 112, 585-615.
Shariff, A. F., & Tracy, J. L. (2011). What are emotion expressions for? Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 20, 395-399.
Warner, L. R., & Shields, S. A. (2007). The perception of crying in women and men: Angry
tears, sad tears, and the “right way” to weep (pp. 92–118). In U. Hess & P. Phillipot
(Eds.), Emotion recognition across social groups. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
Press.
Manuscript submitted September 2011. Accepted for publication June 2012.