ChapterPDF Available

Poses and Postures as Status Displays

Authors:
P
Poses and Postures as Status
Displays
Robert Körner and Astrid Schütz
Department of Psychology, University of
Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany
Synonyms
Power posing, upright postures, expansive body
positions, dominance poses, upright postures,
nonverbal display of status
Definitions
Body positions can be differently related to hier-
archy variables. Power poses (abbr. poses) are
the nonverbal expression of dominance. Upright
body postures (abbr. postures) are the nonverbal
expression of prestige.
Introduction
As ancient philosophers claimed and as recent
research has shown, the body inuences the
mind just as the mind inuences the body
(Niedenthal et al., 2005). On the basis of this
insight, researchers have tried to learn how strong
this connection is and have conducted experi-
ments in which participants were instructed to
hold certain body positions. Consequently, phys-
iological data were recorded, participants were
asked how they felt, and their behavior was
observed. This research dates back to the mid-
twentieth century but received massive attention
when Carney et al. (2010) introduced their studies
on the effects of power poses: They reported that
the adoption of open and expansive body posi-
tions for 12 min increased not only peoples
feelings of power but also their testosterone levels
and their willingness to take risks. They also
reported that these positions decreased the stress
hormone cortisol. Many studies on this topic
followed, and intriguing results were shared with
academia and the public. Many people hoped that
power posing would offer a way to improve peo-
ples lives.
However, when studies that could not replicate
the effects began to be published in 2015 and later,
a heated debate ensued concerning the question of
whether the power posingeffect was real (e.g.,
Cesario & Johnson, 2017). Moreover, researchers
pointed to the presence of publication bias and
questionable research practices in this area of
research, and the rst author of the seminal study
admitted to mistakes and distanced herself from
the research. Until recently, an exhaustive analysis
of the evidential value of the literature has been
missing, and the eld has been separated by advo-
cates on the one hand and skeptics of the effects of
body positions on the other.
Another problem with the initial research on
body positions was that different kinds of bodily
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022
T. K. Shackelford, V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (eds.), Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_3870-1
manipulations were not distinguished. However,
theoretical reasoning suggests that upright pos-
tures and expansive poses should be differentiated
because they may have different origins, mean-
ings, and effects (see Körner & Schütz, 2020).
When referring to the dominance-prestige frame-
work (Cheng & Tracy, 2014; Henrich & Gil-
White, 2001), it can be argued that expansive
poses reect dominance and upright postures
reect prestige.
Dominance and Prestige in Body
Positions
Body positions have been distinguished with
respect to their relationships to two aspects of
status: dominance and prestige (Körner & Schütz,
2020). Dominance relies on the induction of fear
through the use of force, coercion, aggression, and
intimidation in an attempt to attain status (Henrich
& Gil-White, 2001). In self- and peer-reports,
dominance has been found to be associated with
assertiveness, narcissism, hubristic pride, low
agreeableness, and low prosociality. By contrast,
prestige is status that is attributed on the basis of
perceived skills, knowledge, and expertise.
According to self- and peer reports, typical corre-
lates of prestige are communion, agreeableness,
authentic pride, and conscientiousness (Cheng
et al., 2010). Thus, dominance and prestige can
be conceived of as different strategies that can be
used to achieve status and such status provides
power that allows for inuence and control
(Cheng & Tracy, 2014).
On the nonverbal level, status is associated
with nonverbal expansion (Blaker & van Vugt,
2014). However, different forms of expansiveness
can be distinguished: (a) Power poses are charac-
terized by taking up space by assuming extremely
expansive positions on a horizontal level, for
example, opening ones arms or spreading ones
legs. In the original study on power posing, par-
ticipants stood in front of a desk with their hands
wide on a table, or they sat in a chair with their feet
on a table, head tilted up, and hands folded behind
their head (Carney et al., 2010). Low power poses
are characterized by contraction, for example, by
having ones arms slung around ones torso and
crossing ones lower legs. (b) Upright postures are
characterized by vertical expansion. Typical posi-
tions are sitting or standing erect with the chest out
and a straight spine. The contrasting positions are
slumped postures in which the back and shoulders
are bent forward (e.g., Briñol et al., 2009). In
experimental research on body positions, partici-
pants are typically instructed to engage in one of
these positions for 15 min, and various outcomes
are subsequently assessed (Carney et al., 2015;
Körner & Schütz, 2020).
Apparently, the associations between body
positions and the respective concepts of status
are well grounded in common knowledge. The
nonverbal features that formed the blueprint of
power poses were deduced from reports of partic-
ipants who had been asked which nonverbal fea-
tures are associated with dominance (Carney
et al., 2005). By contrast, when participants gen-
erated prestige-related words, they changed their
body along a vertical axis rather than a horizontal
one (Oosterwijk et al., 2009), thus resembling the
change from a slumped to an upright posture. For
these reasons, in recent research, power poses
have been described as nonverbal expressions of
dominance (abbr. poses), and upright postures
have been described as nonverbal expressions of
prestige (abbr. postures; Körner & Schütz,
2020; see also Witkower et al., 2020).
Empirical research has supported this distinc-
tion. Extreme forms of horizontal expansiveness
and high-intensity nonverbal expressions as can
be seen in so-called power poses are considered
typical of dominance (Witkower et al., 2020).
More subtle forms of expansiveness (e.g., subtle
chest expansion) and upright body postures have
been linked to prestige (Körner & Schütz, 2020;
Witkower et al., 2020). From a functionalist per-
spective, it makes sense to describe extreme body
expansiveness as a display of dominance because
dominance is aimed at intimidating opponents.
Only if the formidability of ones body with
respect to height and width/muscularity can
convey toughness and aggression can dominance
be used to achieve status (Witkower et al., 2020).
By contrast, individuals who are characterized by
prestige typically try to avoid instilling fear in
2 Poses and Postures as Status Displays
others because this may be detrimental to their
positive reputation (Körner et al., 2022a). Still,
they strive to gain respect. Thus, an erect but not
extremely expansive body position may serve this
goal well (Körner & Schütz, 2020). In line with
this reasoning, researchers found height to be
associated with both dominance and prestige but
muscularity to be associated with dominance only
(Blaker & van Vugt, 2014).
Findings from Research on Poses and
Postures
Credibility in ndings from studies on poses and
postures has suffered in recent years due to failed
replication attempts (e.g., Cesario & Johnson,
2017). However, in a recent meta-analysis that
included all English- and German-speaking stud-
ies in the eld (both published and unpublished), a
non-trivial effect of adopting body positions was
found (g¼0.35; Körner et al., 2022b). Below we
summarize ndings on the effects of body posi-
tions with regard to different outcomes.
Self-Reports. Poses have been reliably linked to
self-report measures, such as feelings of power,
dominance, being in charge, and being in control
(Gronau et al., 2017; Körner & Schütz, 2020).
Further, poses have repeatedly been found to
increase self-esteem and condence (e.g., Körner
et al., 2021), and this effect has even been
observed in 10-year-old children (Körner et al.,
2020). Moreover, poses have been reported to
increase conrmatory information processing
and lead to preferring a moving ego perspective
instead of a moving time perspective (e.g., Duffy
& Feist, 2016). Upright postures (compared with
slumped postures) have also shown reliable
effects on self-report measures, such as an
increase in the experience of positive emotions
and a decrease in the experience of negative emo-
tions (e.g., Miragall et al., 2020; Nair et al., 2014).
Further, participants reported a higher perceived
leadership ability after engaging in upright pos-
tures compared with participants who engaged in
slumped postures (Arnette & Pettijohn II, 2012).
These ndings are in line with meta-analytical
evidence that both poses and postures show a
small- to medium-sized effect on self-reported
variables (i.e., feelings, thoughts, self-
evaluations; Körner et al., 2022b).
Behavior. The evidential value with behavioral
outcomes is rather mixed. Poses have been linked
to antisocial behavior, which is in line with the
interpretation of poses as dominance (Yap et al.,
2013). Postures as nonverbal expression of pres-
tige have often been linked to task persistence
(Riskind & Gotay, 1982). Yet, poses show hardly
any effect on risk-taking measures and negotiation
success (e.g., Cesario & Johnson, 2017). In a
recent meta-analytical review both types of body
positions have a small to medium effect. How-
ever, the evidence is unstable as publication bias
and/or questionable research practices seem to
affect the ndings (Körner et al., 2022b).
Physiology. Findings on physiological changes
through posing initially sparked strong research
interest (Carney et al., 2010). Researchers who are
interested in poses have often studied testosterone
and cortisol, but replication studies and meta-
analyses have both supported the conclusion that
there is no effect. In studies with posture interven-
tions, cardiovascular parameters have often been
studied, but the overall evidence of physiological
outcomes has likewise been non-signicant and
close to zero (Körner et al., 2022b). Apparently,
engaging in certain body positions for a short
period of time does not have the potential to
change ones hormonal or cardiovascular
responses.
To sum up, whether there are reliable effects of
body positions on the actor depends on the kind of
outcomes that are being studied. The ndings on
self-report variables have been stable and inde-
pendent of age, gender, cultural background
(individualistic vs. collectivistic), and kind of
sample (student vs. non-student; see Körner
et al., 2022b). Still, other aspects of the study
design matter, as elaborated below.
Demand Characteristics. Demand characteris-
tics (i.e., when participantsbehaviors are in line
Poses and Postures as Status Displays 3
with the researchersgoal and hypotheses) have
often been suggested to be a factor in the effects of
body positions. For example, a meta-analysis on
six preregistered experiments found strong evi-
dence of an effect of body positions on feelings
of power, but when participants who were familiar
with power posing were excluded, the overall
effect got smaller (Gronau et al., 2017). This nd-
ing suggests that demand effects partially explain
the effect. In a more recent meta-analytical review
that included 128 independent studies, this nding
was supported: Studies that did not use cover
stories and used within-subjects designs showed
signicantly larger effects than studies that used
cover stories and between-subject designs as the
latter studies avoided the possibility that partici-
pants might guess the purpose of the study
(Körner et al., 2022b). To sum up, demand effects
could explain the results to some extent, but the
overall effects of body positions were still non-
trivial in size when researchers prevented demand
characteristics from affecting the results.
Control Groups. Finally, research on poses and
postures has typically contrasted two experimen-
tal groups. For example, a behavioral outcome
from participants who engaged in a high-power
pose was compared with the same behavioral
outcome from participants who engaged in a
low-power pose (e.g., Yap et al., 2013). Yet, this
design does not allow conclusions to be drawn
about which experimental group drives the effect:
Does engaging in power poses or upright postures
change an individuals thoughts and feelings, or
does engaging in low-power poses or slumped
postures produce these effects? This question
remains open because so far only a limited num-
ber of studies have included control groups
(Körner et al., 2022b). Future research should
include neutral positions to shed more light on
the issue.
Routes Through Which Body Positions
Can Affect the Actor
There are several accounts that explain how body
positions unfold their effects on the actor (e.g.,
grounded cognition or perceptual metaphor
perspectives; Niedenthal et al., 2005). From an
evolutionary psychological perspective, the
dominance-prestige account seems most suitable
for including various theories (particularly learn-
ing theories, self-perception theory, and self-
validation theory) that work together to explain
the underlying processes (see Körner et al.,
2022b).
Evolutionary theories link specic physical
characteristics to dominance and prestige. For
example, in the general population, height is typ-
ically considered a cue for leadership ability
(Blaker & van Vugt, 2014). This association
may be strengthened over the life course through
learning experiences: Specic body positions
become linked to certain states because people
see them as corresponding with a certain aim
(e.g., learning forward to reach something desir-
able symbolizes approach behavior; a slouched
body position that a person may take in a sad
mood becomes associated with feeling
depressed). Thus, certain body positions become
indicators of a persons specic mental state, cer-
tain feelings, and past behavior. Through self-
perception, people may draw conclusions about
their inner states on the basis of their body posi-
tion. Beyond self-perception, observer perception
may strengthen the link: Body positions in every-
day life also serve as indicators of an individuals
status, and people observe others and link specic
nonverbal behaviors with their status.
Body expansiveness, muscularity, and height
are associated with formidability and can there-
fore be linked to dominance. Not only does this
pattern apply in the animal kingdom where
researchers have often observed that size comes
along with dominance (e.g., for research on apes,
see de Waal, 1998), but it also applies to humans.
For example, children may observe that bullies are
big and that they intimidate victims physically.
These children may consequently attribute domi-
nance to tall and broad individuals. By contrast,
children typically perceive adults as competent
and associate height with competence and pres-
tige. This trend is true for adults, too. For example,
tall men can be found in managerial positions
more often than short men (Lindqvist, 2012),
4 Poses and Postures as Status Displays
and thus, observers may link prestigious positions
with height.
Theorists in embodied cognition research have
proposed that the mental is grounded in sensori-
motor modalities and capacities (e.g., body posi-
tions; Niedenthal et al., 2005). If one entity is
activated, the other follows. This form of feedback
means that a dominant body position can activate
dominance-related concepts in the actors mind.
People who engage in a dominant pose will per-
ceive themselves as dominant (see self-perception
theory; Bem, 1967) because they have learned to
attribute expansiveness to dominance. To affect
other mental processes and behavior, further steps
are necessary the idea of being dominant needs
to be validated (cf. self-validation theory; Briñol
& Petty, 2009). Either this idea is liked (status-
related concept are typically considered desirable;
affective validation) or it may be considered cor-
rect (cognitive validation). The same reasoning
applies to prestige and upright postures. People
in an upright posture may attribute respect and
competence to themselves and may like these
proxies of prestige or consider the attributions to
be correct; consequently, they may behave like
someone who possesses prestige and a self-
fullling prophecy may evolve. Thus, through
self-perception and self-validation processes, the
person may ultimately feel, think, and behave in
line with the concepts that are associated with the
body position (dominance or prestige).
Conclusion
Power poses can be understood as nonverbal
expressions of dominance because of their
extreme body expansiveness. In several studies,
they have been reliably linked to feelings of power
and to self-esteem and might affect specic
behaviors. Upright postures are more subtle
aspects of expansiveness and refer to vertical
expansion. They can be understood as nonverbal
expressions of prestige. Adopting upright pos-
tures can make individuals experience more pos-
itive emotions and be more task-persistent. Yet,
behavioral ndings have to be considered with
care and must be replicated in future research.
Finally, neither type of body position has robust
effects on physiological variables. With respect to
factors that inuence the effects of body positions,
demand characteristics might partially explain the
results, but when controlling for such effects, the
effects may still be non-trivial in size. Still, it is not
yet clear whether power poses/upright postures
increase such variables or whether low-power
poses/slumped postures have decreasing effects
and thus, studies with neutral control conditions
are needed. Further, there are several theoretical
accounts of how body positions may unfold their
effects on the actor self-perception and self-
validation processes are well-suited for explaining
how dominance or prestige is activated through
certain body positions.
Cross-References
Adaptations for Navigating Social Hierarchies
Body Posture
Dominance in Humans
Height and Dominance
Indicators and Correlates of Status and
Dominance
Signals of Body Size
References
Arnette, S. L., & Pettijohn, T. F., II. (2012). The effects of
posture on self-perceived leadership. International
Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(14), 813.
Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative inter-
pretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psycho-
logical Review, 74(3), 183200.
Blaker, N. M., & van Vugt, M. (2014). The status-size
hypothesis: How cues of physical size and social status
inuence each other. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, &
C. Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status
(pp. 119137). Springer.
Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2009). Persuasion: Insights from
the self-validation hypothesis. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.
41, pp. 69118). Academic Press.
Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., & Wagner, B. (2009). Body posture
effects on self-evaluation: A self-validation approach.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(6),
10531064.
Poses and Postures as Status Displays 5
Carney, D. R., Hall, J. A., & LeBeau, L. S. (2005). Beliefs
about the nonverbal expression of social power. Jour-
nal of Nonverbal Behavior, 29(2), 105123.
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,
13631369.
Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Yap, A. J. (2015). Review
and summary of research on the embodied effects of
expansive (vs. contractive) nonverbal displays. Psy-
chological Science, 26, 657663.
Cesario, J., & Johnson, D. J. (2017). Power Poseur: Bodily
expansiveness does not matter in dyad-ic interactions.
Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(7),
781789.
Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2014). Toward a unied
science of hierarchy: Dominance and prestige are two
fundamental pathways to human social rank. In J. T.
Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C. Anderson (Eds.), The psychol-
ogy of social status (pp. 327). Springer.
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride,
personality, and the evolutionary foundations of
human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior,
31(5), 334347.
de Waal, F. (1998). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex
among apes. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Duffy, S. E., & Feist, M. I. (2016). Power in time: The
inuence of power posing on metaphoric perspectives
on time. Language and Cognition, 9(4), 637647.
Gronau, Q. F., Van Erp, S., Heck, D. W., Cesario, J., Jonas,
K. J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2017). A Bayesian model-
averaged meta-analysis of the power pose effect with
informed and de-fault priors: The case of felt power.
Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology, 2,
123138.
Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of
prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism
for enhancing the benets of cultural transmission.
Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 165196.
Körner, R., & Schütz, A. (2020). Dominance or prestige:
A review of the effects of power poses and other body
postures. Social and Personality Psychology Compass,
14(8), Article e12559.
Körner, R., Köhler, H., & Schütz, A. (2020). Powerful and
condent children through expansive body postures?
A preregistered study of fourth graders. School Psy-
chology International, 41(4), 315330.
Körner, R., Petersen, L.-E., & Schütz, A. (2021). Do
expansive or contractive body postures affect feelings
of self-worth? High power poses impact state self-
esteem. Current Psychology, 40(8), 41124124.
Körner, R., Overbeck, J. R., Körner, E., & Schütz,
A. (2022a). How the linguistic styles of Donald
Trump and Joe Biden reect different forms of power.
Journal of Language and Social Psychology. Advance
online publication.
Körner, R., Röseler, L., Schütz, A., & Bushman, B. J.
(2022b). Dominance and prestige: Meta-analytic
review of experimentally induced body position effects
on behavioral, self-report, and physiological dependent
variables. Psychological Bulletin. Advance online
publication.
Lindqvist, E. (2012). Height and leadership. Review of
Economics and Statistics, 94(4), 11911196.
Miragall, M., Borrego, A., Cebolla, A., Etchemendy, E.,
Navarro-Siurana, J., Llorens, R., ... Baños, R. M.
(2020). Effect of an upright (vs. stooped) posture on
interpretation bias, imagery, and emotions. Journal of
Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 68,
Article 101560.
Nair, S., Sagar, M., Sollers, J., Consedine, N., &
Broadbent, E. (2014). Do slumped and upright postures
affect stress responses? A randomized trial. Health
Psychology, 34, 632641.
Niedenthal, P. M., Barsalou, L. W., Winkielman, P.,
Krauth-Gruber, S., & Ric, F. (2005). Embodiment in
attitudes, social perception, and emotion. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 9(3), 184211.
Oosterwijk, S., Rotteveel, M., Fischer, A. H., & Hess,
U. (2009). Embodied emotion concepts: How generat-
ing words about pride and disappointment inuences
posture. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(3),
457466.
Riskind, J. H., & Gotay, C. C. (1982). Physical posture:
Could it have regulatory or feedback effects on moti-
vation and emotion? Motivation and Emotion, 6(3),
273298.
Witkower, Z., Tracy, J. L., Cheng, J. T., & Henrich,
J. (2020). Two signals of social rank: Prestige and
dominance are associated with distinct nonverbal dis-
plays. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
118 (1), 89129.
Yap, A. J., Wazlawek, A. S., Lucas, B. J., Cuddy, A. J. C.,
& Carney, D. R. (2013). The ergonomics of dishonesty:
The effect of incidental posture on stealing, cheating,
and trafc violations. Psychological Science, 24(11),
22812289.
6 Poses and Postures as Status Displays
... Alternatively, these differences may reflect that upright postures project affiliation and agreeableness, both of which are feminine attributes (Körner and Schütz, 2022;Körner and Schuetz, 2020;Maner, 2017). Furthermore, upright postures are associated with competence (Körner and Schütz, 2022;Körner and Schuetz, 2020;Maner, 2017) which is particularly important for women(sg) in work environments who can experience greater workplace discrimination, lower pay rates, and are less likely to be promoted than men(sg) (Nandkeolyar et al., 2022). ...
... Alternatively, these differences may reflect that upright postures project affiliation and agreeableness, both of which are feminine attributes (Körner and Schütz, 2022;Körner and Schuetz, 2020;Maner, 2017). Furthermore, upright postures are associated with competence (Körner and Schütz, 2022;Körner and Schuetz, 2020;Maner, 2017) which is particularly important for women(sg) in work environments who can experience greater workplace discrimination, lower pay rates, and are less likely to be promoted than men(sg) (Nandkeolyar et al., 2022). Alternatives such as flexed spinal postures are associated with less power and may exacerbate gendered perceptions of competence, while postures which expand and take up horizontal space (e.g. ...
... Alternatives such as flexed spinal postures are associated with less power and may exacerbate gendered perceptions of competence, while postures which expand and take up horizontal space (e.g. reclined backwards, wide limb positions) are associated with dominance (Körner and Schütz, 2022;Körner and Schuetz, 2020) which subverts female gender norms (Nandkeolyar et al., 2022). This may result in a narrower range of options for women(g) who need to display competence without appearing dominant (Nandkeolyar et al., 2022). ...
Article
Background: Biomechanical and pain prevalence differences between sex/gender groups are frequently attributed to biological differences between sexes without considering the influence of socially-constructed gender. This may lead to interventions which are insufficient and culturally unresponsive. This review reinterprets the evidence regarding differences in desk-based postural behaviour between sex/gender groups from a gender-based perspective. Methods: Four prominent databases were searched using terms such as ‘desk based’, ‘posture’, and ‘position’. Articles were included if they objectively investigated desk-based positional variability, postural variability and/or habitual alignment in healthy adults. Results: Nine studies were included. Differences were found in postural variability and habitual alignment between sex/gender groups and were not explored from a gender-based perspective. Conclusion: Gender-based expectations regarding ‘acceptable’ posture and movement likely contribute to biomechanical and pain differences between genders. This should be considered by clinicians intending to affect patients’ movement and postural patterns and by researchers working in this space.
Article
Full-text available
Early research on body positions suggested that engaging in certain nonverbal displays can lead to changes in self-report, behavioral, and physiological dependent variables. Still, there has been intense criticism regarding the replicability of these effects. To determine what effects are valid, we conducted a meta-analytic review on body position studies. We used the dominance–prestige framework and distinguished between high-power poses representing dominance and upright postures representing prestige. We preregistered our meta-analysis, used the largest sample of studies thus far, and analyzed several theoretical and exploratory moderator variables. Based on 313 effects from 88 studies involving 9,779 participants, evidence was obtained for an overall statistically significant effect of body positions that was not trivial in size, g = 0.35 (95% CI [0.28,0.42]). Both the poses and postures showed effects for self-report and behavioral dependent variables but not for physiological dependent variables. However, sensitivity analyses suggested that effects for behavioral dependent variables were influenced by publication bias and/or outliers. Effects were noticeably larger in studies without cover stories and in studies that used within-subjects designs, suggesting that demand characteristics might partially explain the results. Whether participants were male or female, students or nonstudents, or from an individualistic or collectivistic culture did not make a difference. We also present an app that researchers can use to enter data from future studies and thus obtain up-to-date metaanalytical results on this topic. Future research should investigate whether high-power poses/upright postures increase effects and/or whether low-power poses/slumped postures decrease effects
Article
Full-text available
Can theories of power be used to explain differences in the linguistic styles of Donald Trump and Joe Biden? We argue that the two candidates possess and use different forms of power—and that this is associated with typical language patterns. Based on their personal history, news reports, and empirical studies, we expect that Trump’s approach to power is characterized by coercive power forms and Biden’s by collaborative power forms. Using several LIWC categories and the moral foundations dictionary, we analyzed over 500 speeches and 15,000 tweets made during the 2020 election battle. Biden’s speeches can be described as analytical and frequently relating to moral values, whereas Trump’s speeches were characterized by a positive emotional tone. In tweets, Biden used more social words and words related to virtue, honesty, and achievement than Trump did. Trump’s coercive power and Biden’s collaborative power were more observable in tweets than speeches, which may reflect the fact that tweets are more spontaneous than speeches.
Article
Full-text available
Research on the effects of body positions has attracted enormous attention in recent years but has been plagued by failed replication attempts. Today, there is some confusion about which effects can be considered reliable. One problem that may have contributed to this confusion is the fact that most previous studies have not clearly distinguished between different types of body positions. We apply the dominance‐prestige framework to distinguish between two types of body positions. On the basis of this reasoning, we argue that research on so‐called power poses in fact has analyzed expansiveness as an indicator of dominance, whereas research on postures has focused on the straightness of the spine, which may be seen as a display of prestige. We review the literature and conclude that there is no clear evidence that short‐term interventions involving body positions affect physiology or behavior. Still, there are effects on actors' self‐perceptions. Repeatedly, studies on power poses have found effects on feelings of power and self‐evaluations, and studies on postures have found effects on emotional experience. However, there is hardly any research that has directly compared the two types of interventions.
Article
Full-text available
Do expansive body postures increase self-esteem in children? Power posing is a popular but also controversial topic. Still, there has been no research on the possible effects in children. To investigate the influence of power posing in children, 108 German fourth graders were randomly assigned to a high versus a low power posing group. Self-esteem was self-reported; feelings were assessed indirectly. There was an effect of power posing on self-reported global and school self-esteem. Furthermore, children who had performed high power poses in comparison with those who had performed low power poses mentioned more positive feelings, higher power feelings, and a more positive student–teacher relationship. Results are interpreted with regard to the context and the cultural dependency of the power posing effect. Implications for school practice are addressed.
Article
Full-text available
The aim of the present studies was to investigate how high and low power posing influence self-esteem. High power posing is understood as the nonverbal expression of power through open, expansive body postures, whereas low power posing is marked by contractive and closed body postures. We conducted three studies with different methodological designs to test the effects of power posing. In Study 1, we randomly assigned 120 students to one of two power posing groups or a control group. All participants completed the State Self-Esteem Scale before and after the intervention. In Study 2, we examined effects outside the laboratory in a natural environment. We asked 49 participants to engage in high power posing in their homes. In Study 3, a total of 98 participants took part in an independent-groups posttest design (low power posing vs. high power posing). We also controlled for participants’ awareness of the research hypotheses. Consistent with our hypotheses, high power posing significantly affected self-esteem in all three studies. Contrary to our expectations, low power posing had no effect on self-esteem in Study 1. Possible explanations and implications are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Converging evidence suggests that high rank is communicated through various nonverbal behaviors (e.g., expansiveness), but prior studies have not examined whether 2 distinct forms of high rank-known as prestige and dominance-are communicated through distinct nonverbal displays. Given the divergent messages that prestigious and dominant leaders need to send in order to attain and retain their place in the social hierarchy, theoretical accounts would suggest that individuals use distinct sets of nonverbal behaviors to communicate these 2 forms of high rank. In the present research, we tested this hypothesis in 7 studies, using carefully controlled experimental designs (Studies 1, 2, 3, 4a, and 4b) and the assessment of spontaneously displayed nonverbal behaviors that occurred during a lab-based group interaction (Study 5) and a real-world political contest (Study 6). Results converged across studies to show that prestige and dominance strategies are associated with distinct sets of nonverbal behaviors, which are largely consistent with theoretical predictions. Specifically, prestige, or the attainment of rank through earned respect, and dominance, or the use of intimidation and force to obtain power, are communicated from different head positions (i.e., tilted upward vs. downward), smiling behaviors (i.e., presence vs. absence of a symmetrical smile), and different forms of bodily expansion (i.e., subtle chest expansion vs. more grandiose space-taking). These findings provide the first evidence for 2 distinct signals of high rank, which spontaneously emerge in social interactions and guide social perceptions and the conferral of power.
Article
Full-text available
Earlier work found that – compared to participants who adopted constrictive body postures – participants who adopted expansive body postures reported feeling more powerful, showed an increase in testosterone and a decrease in cortisol, and displayed an increased tolerance for risk. However, these power pose effects have recently come under considerable scrutiny. Here, we present a Bayesian metaanalysis of six preregistered studies from this special issue, focusing on the effect of power posing on felt power. Our analysis improves on standard classical meta-analyses in several ways. First and foremost, we considered only preregistered studies, eliminating concerns about publication bias. Second, the Bayesian approach enables us to quantify evidence for both the alternative and the null hypothesis. Third, we use Bayesian model-averaging to account for the uncertainty with respect to the choice for a fixed-effect model or a random-effect model. Fourth, based on a literature review, we obtained an empirically informed prior distribution for the between-study heterogeneity of effect sizes. This empirically informed prior can serve as a default choice not only for the investigation of the power pose effect but for effects in the field of psychology more generally. For effect size, we considered a default and an informed prior. Our meta-analysis yields very strong evidence for an effect of power posing on felt power. However, when the analysis is restricted to participants unfamiliar with the effect, the meta-analysis yields evidence that is only moderate.
Article
Full-text available
Strong claims have been made that power poses can significantly improve one's life. Starting from an evolutionary perspective, we reason that expansive poses will have no impact in more realistic situations, as in the presence of an interaction partner or when participants are aware of what the pose should accomplish. Across four dyadic studies including both commonlyused outcomes as well as a negotiation task (which could actually have direct benefits for one's life), we find nearly uniform null effects of holding expansive poses, despite checks confirming the success of the manipulation. For example, in two of the studies, participants watched a popular TED talk on power poses, held an expansive pose, and then completed a negotiation in the presence of a partner, as might happen in real life. We argue that researchers should stop recommending power poses as an empirically-supported strategy for improving one's life.
Article
Full-text available
In English, the Moving Ego metaphor conceptualizes the ego as moving forward through time and the Moving Time metaphor construes time as moving forward toward the ego. Recent research has provided evidence that people’s metaphorical perspectives on deictic time may be influenced by experiences—both spatial and non-spatial—that are connected to approach motivations (Moving Ego) and avoidance motivations (Moving Time). We extend this research further, asking whether there are differences in preferred temporal perspective between those who exhibit higher and lower degrees of power, as high power has been connected to approach motivations and low power, to avoidance motivations. Across two temporal tasks, participants in our study who adopted high-power poses demonstrated a greater preference for the Moving Ego perspective, compared to those adopting low-power poses. These results suggest an embodied connection between approach and avoidance motivations and the Moving Ego and Moving Time metaphors, respectively.
Article
Background and objectives: Adopting an upright (vs. stooped) posture has been related to positive effects on emotional and cognitive processes. However, there is no evidence concerning the effect of posture on two key processes associated with the maintenance of depression: interpretation bias and vividness of mental imagery. The objectives were to investigate the effect of adopting an upright (vs. stooped) posture on interpretation bias and vividness of positive and negative mental imagery, and to explore the interplay between these processes and depression-related emotions. Methods: The sample consisted of 54 participants (Mage = 22.00, 64.8% women), who were randomly assigned to the upright or stooped condition. Participants answered self-report measures while they were adopting a specific posture. Posture was monitored through inertial technology. Results: Main results were that: upright (vs. stooped) posture led to more positive interpretations of ambiguous information and increased positive emotions related to depression (happiness, optimism and vigor); time in an upright position was associated with change in interpretation bias and vividness of positive mental imagery; and level of depressive symptomatology moderated the effect of posture on the change in interpretation bias. Limitations: Limitations are related to the use of non-clinical sample, the use of short-term measurements, and the lack of an experimental condition adopting the usual posture. Conclusions: Posture interacts with mechanisms involved in the maintenance of depression, as well as with depression-related emotions. This study has clinical implications that should be continued explored in order to clarify the role of manipulating the posture in individuals with depressive symptomatology.