ArticlePDF Available

Power Posing: Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Humans and other animals express power through open, expansive postures, and they express powerlessness through closed, contractive postures. But can these postures actually cause power? The results of this study confirmed our prediction that posing in high-power nonverbal displays (as opposed to low-power nonverbal displays) would cause neuroendocrine and behavioral changes for both male and female participants: High-power posers experienced elevations in testosterone, decreases in cortisol, and increased feelings of power and tolerance for risk; low-power posers exhibited the opposite pattern. In short, posing in displays of power caused advantaged and adaptive psychological, physiological, and behavioral changes, and these findings suggest that embodiment extends beyond mere thinking and feeling, to physiology and subsequent behavioral choices. That a person can, by assuming two simple 1-min poses, embody power and instantly become more powerful has real-world, actionable implications.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Power Posing 1
Running head: POWER POSING
Power Posing: Brief Nonverbal Displays Affect Neuroendocrine Levels and Risk Tolerance
Dana R. Carney
Columbia University
Amy J. C. Cuddy
Harvard University
Andy J. Yap
Columbia University
In press at Psychological Science
Abstract = 123 words; Text = 2499; References = 35; Figures = 4
Power Posing 2
Abstract
Humans and other animals express power through open, expansive postures, and powerlessness
through closed, constrictive postures. But can these postures actually cause power? As predicted,
results revealed that posing in high-power (vs. low-power) nonverbal displays caused
neuroendocrine and behavioral changes for both male and female participants: High-power
posers experienced elevations in testosterone, decreases in cortisol, and increased feelings of
power and tolerance for risk; low-power posers exhibited the opposite pattern. In short, posing in
powerful displays caused advantaged and adaptive psychological, physiological, and behavioral
changes -- findings that suggest that embodiment extends beyond mere thinking and feeling, to
physiology and subsequent behavioral choices. That a person can, via a simple two-minute pose,
embody power and instantly become more powerful has real-world, actionable implications.
Power Posing 3
The proud peacock fans his tail feathers in pursuit of a mate. By galloping sideways, the
cat manipulates an intruder’s perception of her size. The chimpanzee, asserting his hierarchical
rank, holds his breath until his chest bulges. And the executive in the boardroom crests the table
with his feet, fingers interlaced behind his neck, elbows pointing outward. Humans and other
animals display power and dominance through expansive nonverbal displays, and these power
poses are deeply intertwined with the evolutionary selection of what is “alpha” (Darwin, 1872;
de Waal, 1998; Ellyson & Dovidio, 1985).
But is power embodied? What happens when these displays are posed? Can posed
displays cause one to feel more powerful? Do one’s mental and physiological systems prepare
one to be more powerful? The goal of this research was to test whether high-power (vs. low-
power) poses actually produce power, by looking at their effects on some fundamental features
of having power: feeling powerful, elevation of the dominance hormone testosterone, lowering
of the stress hormone cortisol, and an increased tolerance for risk.
Power determines access to resources (de Waal, 1998; Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson,
2003), agency and control over one’s own body and mind and positive feelings (Keltner et al.,
2003), and enhanced cognitive function (Smith, Jostmann, Galinsky, & van Dijk, 2008).
Powerful individuals demonstrate greater willingness to engage in action (Galinsky, Gruenfeld,
& Magee, 2003; Keltner et al., 2003), and often show increased risk taking behavior (Anderson
& Galinsky, 2006; Davis et al., 2009)0F
1.
The neuroendocrine profiles of the powerful differentiate them from the powerless, on
two key hormones -- testosterone and cortisol. In humans and other animals, testosterone levels
both reflect and reinforce dispositional and situational status and dominance; internal and
external cues cause testosterone to rise, increasing dominant behaviors, which further elevate
Power Posing 4
testosterone (Archer, 2006; Mazur & Booth, 1998). For example, testosterone rises in
anticipation of a competition and as a result of a win, but drops following a defeat (Booth et al.,
1989; Mazur, Booth, & Dabbs, 1992) -- and these changes predict the desire to compete again
(Mehta & Josephs, 2006). In short, testosterone levels are closely linked to adaptive responses to
challenges, both reflecting and reinforcing dominance.
Power is also linked to the stress hormone cortisol, such that power-holders show lower
basal cortisol and lower cortisol reactivity to stressors, and cortisol drops as power is achieved
(Abbott et al., 2003; Coe, Mendoza, & Levine, 1979; Sapolsky, Alberts, & Altmann, 1997).
Although short-term and acute cortisol elevation is part of an adaptive response to challenges
large and small (e.g., a predator and waking up), chronically elevated cortisol seen in low-power
individuals is associated with negative health consequences like impaired immune functioning,
hypertension, and memory loss (Sapolsky et al., 1997; Segerstrom & Miller, 2004), and low-
power social groups have a higher incidence of stress-related illnesses, partially attributed to
chronically elevated cortisol (Cohen et al., 2006). Thus, the power-holder’s typical
neuroendocrine profile of high testosterone coupled with low cortisol, linked to such outcomes as
disease resistance (Sapolsky, 2005) and leadership abilities (Mehta & Josephs, 2010), appears to
be optimally adaptive.
Unequivocally, power is expressed through highly specific, evolved nonverbal displays.
Expansive, open postures (widespread limbs, enlargement of occupied space, and spreading out)
project high power, whereas constrictive, closed postures (limbs touching the torso, minimizing
occupied space, and collapsed inwardly) project low power – patterns that have been identified
in research on actual and attributed power and its nonverbal correlates (Carney, Hall, & Smith
LeBeau, 2005; Darwin, 1872; de Waal, 1998; Ellyson & Dovidio, 1985; Hall, Coats, & Smith
Power Posing 5
LeBeau, 2005). Although we know that power generates these displays, no research has asked
whether these displays generate power -- will posing these powerful displays actually cause
individuals to feel more powerful, focus on reward as opposed to risk, and experience increases
in testosterone and decreases in cortisol?
In research on embodied cognition, some evidence suggests bodily movements, such as
facial displays, can affect emotional states. For example, unobtrusive contraction of the “smile
muscle” (i.e., the zygomaticus major) increases enjoyment (Strack, Martin, Stepper, 1988); the
head tilting upwards induces pride (Stepper & Strack, 1993); and hunched (vs. upright) physical
postures elicit more depressed feelings (Riskind & Gotay, 1982). Approach-oriented behaviors,
such as touching, pulling, or nodding “yes,” increase preference for objects, people, and
persuasive messages (e.g., Briñol & Petty, 2003; Chen & Bargh, 1999; Wegner, Lane, & Dimitri,
1994); and fist clenching increases men’s self-ratings on power-related traits (Schubert & Koole,
2009). However, no research has tested whether expansive versus constrictive power poses cause
mental, physiological, and behavioral change in a manner consistent with the effects of power.
Specifically, we hypothesized that high- versus low-power poses would cause individuals to
experience: (1) elevated testosterone, (2) decreased cortisol, (3) increased feelings of power, and
(4) higher risk-tolerance. Such findings would suggest that embodiment goes beyond cognition
and emotion and could have immediate and actionable impacts on behavior.
Method
Participants and Overview of Procedure
Forty-two (26 female) participants were randomly assigned to the high- or low-power
pose condition. Saliva samples were taken before and approximately 17 minutes after the power
pose manipulation. Participants believed the study was about the science of physiological
Power Posing 6
recordings focusing on how placement of Electrocardiography (ECG) electrodes above and
below the heart could influence data collection. Participants’ bodies were posed by an
experimenter into high-power or low-power poses. Each participant held two poses for 1-minute
each. Participants’ risk taking was measured with a gambling task; powerful feelings were
measured with self-report.
Power Poses
Poses were harvested from the nonverbal literature (e.g., Hall et al., 2005; Carney et al.,
2005) and varied on the two nonverbal dimensions universally linked to power: expansiveness
(i.e., taking up more vs. less space) and openness (i.e., open vs. closed limbs). The two high-
power poses into which participants were configured are depicted in Figure 1 and the two low-
power poses in Figure 2. To be sure the poses chosen conveyed power appropriately, 95 pre-test
participants rated each pose from 1 (very low power) to 7 (very high power). High-power poses
(M = 5.39, SD = .99) were rated significantly higher on power than low-power poses (M = 2.41,
SD = .93), t(94) = 21.03, p < .001; r = 99.
To be sure changes in neuroendocrine levels, powerful feelings, or behavior could be
attributed to high or low power attributes of the poses, 19 participants pre-tested the pose
manipulation on comfort, difficulty, and pain. Participants made all four poses (while wearing
ECG leads) and completed questionnaires after each. There were no differences between high-
and low-power poses on: comfort/discomfort, t(16) = .24, p > .80, ease/difficulty, t(16) = .77,
p > .45, or painlessness/painfulness, t(16) = -.82, p > .42.
To configure participants into the poses, the experimenter placed an ECG lead on the
back of each calf and the underbelly of the left arm and explained, “To test accuracy of
physiological responses as a function of sensor placement relative to your heart, you are being
Power Posing 7
put into a certain physical position” and proceeded to manually configure participants’ bodies by
lightly touching arms and legs and providing additional verbal descriptions when needed. An
examples of an additional verbal description is, “keep your feet above heart level by putting them
on the desk in front of you.” Participants were videotaped; all correctly made and held all poses.
After manually configuring participants’ bodies into each of the two (1-min) poses, the
experimenter left the room and participants formed impressions of 9 faces.
Measure of Risk Taking and Powerful Feelings
After posing, participants were endowed with $2 and told they could keep it – the safe bet,
or roll the die and risk losing the $2 for a payout of $4 (a risky but rational bet; odds of winning
were 50/50). Finally, participants indicated how “powerful” and “in charge” they felt on a scale
from 1 (not at all) to 4 (a lot).
Saliva Collection and Analysis
Testing was scheduled in the afternoon (12:00-6:00pm) to control for diurnal rhythms in
hormones (e.g., Kudielka, et al., 2004). Saliva samples were taken approximately 10 minutes
after arrival and again 17 minutes after the power pose manipulation (M = 17.28 minutes; SD =
4.31).
Standard salivary hormone collection procedures were used (Dickerson & Kemeny, 2004;
Schultheiss & Stanton, 2009). Before providing saliva samples, participants didn’t eat, drink, or
brush teeth for at least one hour. Participants rinsed their mouths with water and chewed a piece
of sugar-free Trident Original Flavor gum for 3 minutes to stimulate salivation (this procedure
yields the least bias as compared to passive drool procedures; Dabbs, 1991). Participants
provided approximately 1.5 mL of saliva through a straw into a sterile polypropylene
microtubule. Samples were immediately frozen to avoid hormone degradation and to precipitate
Power Posing 8
mucins, and within two weeks were packed in dry ice and shipped for analysis to Salimetrics in
State College, PA where samples were assayed for salivary cortisol and testosterone in duplicate
using a highly-sensitive enzyme immunoassay. For cortisol, the intra-assay coefficient of
variation (CV) was 5.40% for time 1 and 4.40% for time 2. The average inter-assay CV across
high and low controls for both time-points was 2.74%. Cortisol levels were in the normal range
at both time 1 (M = .16 µg/dL; SD = .19) and time 2 (M = .12 µg/dL; SD = .08). For testosterone
the intra-assay CV was 4.30% for time 1 and 3.80% for time 2. The average inter-assay CV
across high and low controls for both time-points was 3.80%. Testosterone levels were in the
normal range at both time 1 (M = 60.30 pg/mL; SD = 49.58) and time 2 (M = 57.40 pg/mL; SD =
43.25). As would be suggested by appropriately taken and assayed samples (Schultheiss &
Stanton, 2009), men were higher on testosterone at both time 1 (F[1, 41] = 17.40, p < .001; r
= .55) and time 2 (F[1, 41] = 22.55, p < .001; r = .60). To control for sex differences in
testosterone, participant sex was used as a covariate in all analyses. All hormone analyses
examined changes in hormones observed at time 2 controlling for time 1. Analyses with cortisol
controlled for testosterone and vice-versa1F
2.
Results
To examine changes in testosterone and cortisol, one-way ANOVAs examined the impact
of power-pose on post-manipulation hormones (time 2) controlling for baseline hormones (time
1). As hypothesized, Figure 3 shows that high-power poses caused an increase in testosterone as
compared to low-power poses, which caused a decrease, F(1, 39) = 4.29, p < .05; r = .34. Also as
hypothesized, Figure 4 shows that high-power poses caused a decrease in cortisol as compared to
low-power poses, which caused an increase, F(1, 38) = 7.45, p < .02; r = .43.
Power Posing 9
Also consistent with predictions, high-power posers were more likely to focus on rewards
-- 86.36% took the gambling risk (only 13.63% were risk averse). In contrast, only 60% of the
low-power posers took the risk (and 40% were risk averse), χ2(1, N = 42) = 3.86, p < .05; Ф
= .30. Finally, high-power posers reported feeling significantly more “powerful” and “in charge”
(M = 2.57, SD = .81) than the low-power posers (M = 1.83; SD = .81), F(1, 41) = 9.53, p < .01; r
= .44. Thus, a simple 2-minute power pose manipulation was enough to significantly alter the
physiological, mental, and feeling states of our participants. The implications of this result for
everyday life are substantial.
Discussion
Results show that posing in high-power (versus low-power) displays causes physiological,
psychological, and behavioral changes consistent with the literature on the effects of power on
power-holders – elevation of the dominance hormone testosterone, reduction of the stress
hormone cortisol, and increases in behaviorally demonstrated risk-tolerance and feelings of
power.
These findings advance our understanding of embodied cognition in two important ways.
First, they suggest that the effects of embodiment extend beyond emotion and cognition, to
physiology and subsequent behavioral choice. For example, as described above, nodding one’s
head “yes” leads to more persuasion, and smiling increases humor responses; we suggest that
these simple behaviors, a head-nod or a smile, might also cause physiological changes that
activate an entire trajectory of psychological, physiological, and behavioral shifts—essentially
altering the course of that person’s day. Second, these results suggest that any psychological
construct, such as power, with a signature pattern of nonverbal correlates may be embodied.
Power Posing 10
These results also offer a methodological advance in power research. Many reported
effects of power are limited by the methodological necessity of manipulating power in a
laboratory setting (e.g., complex role assignments). The simple, elegant power pose manipulation
can be taken directly into the field and used to investigate ordinary people in everyday contexts.
Is it possible that the findings are limited to the specific poses utilized in this experiment?
While the power-infusing attribute of expansiveness and the poses that capture it requires further
investigation, findings from an additional study (N = 49) suggest that the effects reported here
are not idiosyncratic to these specific poses. Consistent with the poses used in the current report,
three additional high- and three low-power poses produced the same effects on powerful feelings,
F (1, 48) = 4.38, p < .05, r = .30; and risk-taking, χ2 (df = 1, N = 49) = 4.84, p < .03; Φ = .31.
By simply changing one’s physical posture, an individual prepares his or her mental and
physiological systems to endure difficult and stressful situations, and perhaps to actually improve
confidence and performance in such situations – such as interviewing for jobs, public speaking,
disagreeing with a boss, or taking potentially profitable risks. These findings suggest that, in
some situations requiring power, people have the ability to ‘fake it ‘til they make it.Over time
and in aggregate, these minimal postural changes and their outcomes potentially could improve a
person’s general health and wellbeing, which is particularly important when considering people
who are or feel chronically powerless due to lack of resources, hierarchical rank in an
organization, or membership in a low-power social group.
Power Posing 11
References
Abbott, D. H, Keverne, E. B., Bercovitch, F. B., Shively, C. A., Mendoza, S.P., Saltzman, W.,
Snowdon, C. T., Ziegler, T. E., Banjevic, M., Garland Jr, T., & Sapolsky, R. M. (2003).
Are subordinates always stressed? A comparative analysis of rank differences in cortisol
levels among primates. Hormones and Behavior, 43, 67–82.
Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and the proclivity for risk. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 511-536.
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis.
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 30, 319–345.
Booth, A., Shelley, G., Mazur, A., Tharp, G., & Kittok, R. (1989). Testosterone and winning and
losing in human competition. Hormones and Behavior, 23, 556–571.
Briñol, P. & Petty, R. E (2003). Overt head movements and persuasion: A self-validation
analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1123-1139.
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.
Chen, M., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Consequences of automatic evaluation: Immediate behavioral
predispositions to approach or avoid the stimulus. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 25, 215-224.
Coe, C. L., Mendoza, S. P., & Levine, S.(1979). Social status constrains the stress response in
the squirrel monkey. Physiology and Behavior, 23, 633–638.
Cohen, S., Schwartz, J. E., Epel, E., Kirschbaum, C., Sidney, S., & Seeman, T. (2006).
Socioeconomic status, race, and diurnal cortisol decline in the coronary artery risk
development in young adults (CARDIA) study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 68, 41-50.
Power Posing 12
Dabbs, J. M. (1991). Salivary testosterone measurements: Collecting, storing, and mailing saliva
samples. Physiology and Behavior, 42, 815–817.
Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in man and animals. New York: Oxford.
Davis, J. F., Krause, E. G., Melhorn, S. J., Sakai, R. R., & Benoit, S. C. (2009). Dominant rats
are natural risk takers and display increased motivation for food reward. Neuroscience,
162, 23-30.
de Waal, F. (1998). Chimpanzee politics: Power and sex among apes. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins.
Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol responses: A theoretical
integration and synthesis of laboratory research. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 355-391.
Ellyson, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1985). Power, dominance, and nonverbal behavior. New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 327-339.
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.
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition.
Psychological Review, 110, 265–284.
Kudielka, B. M., Schommer, N. C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Kirschbaum, C. (2004). Acute HPA
axis responses, heart rate, and mood changes to psychosocial stress (TSST) in humans at
different times of day. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 29, 983-992.
Power Posing 13
Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., Butz, D. A. & Peruche, B. M. (2007). Power, risk, and the status
quo: Does having authority promote riskier or more conservative decision-making?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 451-462.
Mazur, A., & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 21, 353–397.
Mazur, A., Booth, A., & Dabbs, J. M. (1992). Testosterone and chess competition. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 55, 70–77.
Mehta, P. H., & Josephs, R. A. (2010). Dual-hormone regulation of dominance. Working paper,
Columbia University.
Mehta, P. H., & Josephs, R. A. (2006). Testosterone change after losing predicts the decision to
compete again. Hormones and Behavior, 50, 684–692.
Riskind, J. H., & Gotay, C. C. (1982). Physical posture: Could it have regulatory or feedback
effects on motivation and emotion? Motivation and Emotion, 6, 273-298.
Ronay, R., & von Hippel, W. (2010). Power, testosterone and risk-taking: The moderating
influence of testosterone and executive functions. Journal of Behavioral Decision
Making.
Sapolsky, R. M. (2005). The influence of social hierarchy on primate health. Science. 308, 648-
652.
Sapolsky, R. M., Alberts, S. C., & Altmann, J. (1997). Hypercortisolism associated with social
subordinance or social isolation among wild baboons. Archives of General Psychiatry, 54,
1137–1143.
Schubert, T. W., & Koole, S. L. (2009). The embodied self: Making a fist enhances men’s
power-related self-conceptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 828-834.
Power Posing 14
Schultheiss, O. C., & Stanton, S. J. (2009). Assessment of salivary hormones. In E. Harmon-
Jones & J. S. Beer (Eds.), Methods in the neurobiology of social and personality
psychology (pp. 17-44). New York: Guilford.
Segerstrom, S., & Miller, G. (2004). Psychological stress and the human immune system: A
meta-analytic study of 30 years of inquiry. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 601–630.
Smith P. K., Jostmann N. B., Galinsky A. D., & van Dijk W. W. (2008). Lacking power impairs
executive functions. Psychological Science, 19, 441-447.
Stepper, S., & Strack, F. (1993). Proprioceptive determinants of emotional and nonemotional
feelings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 211- 220.
Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the
human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 768–777.
Wegner, D. M., Lane, J. D., & Dimitri, S. (1994). The allure of secret relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 287-300.
Power Posing 15
Figure 1: High-power Poses (Expansive)
Figure 2: Low-power Poses (Constrictive)
Power Posing 16
Figure 3: Change in Dominance Hormone Testosterone (depicted as difference scores; statistical
analysis examined time 2 controlling for time 1; error bars are SEs)
-16.00
-12.00
-8.00
-4.00
0.00
4.00
8.00
12.00
16.00
Hig h power poses
Lo w pow er poses
Testosteron e change (p g/mL)
Power Posing 17
Figure 4: Change in Stress Hormone Cortisol (depicted as difference scores; statistical analysis
examined time 2 controlling for time 1; error bars are SEs)
Hig h power poses
Lo w pow er poses
Cortisol change (ug/dL)
Power Posing 18
Notes
1 The effect of power on risk-taking is moderated by power motivation (Maner, Gailliot, Butz, &
Peruche, 2007) and prenatal exposure to testosterone (Ronay & von Hippel, 2010).
2 Cortisol scores at both time points were sufficiently normally distributed except for two outliers
that were more than 3 SDs above the mean and were excluded; testosterone scores at both time
points were sufficiently normally distributed except for one outlier that was more than 3 SDs
above the mean and was excluded.
... Almost all subdisciplines in psychology are concerned with effects of body positions on thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Researchers from social psychology (e.g., Carney et al., 2010), personality psychology (e.g., , biological psychology (e.g., Turan, 2015), educational psychology (e.g., Inagaki et al., 2018), cognitive psychology (e.g., Chadwick et al., 2019), and clinical psychology (e.g., Miragall et al., 2020) have tested the consequences of adopting certain body positions. These findings have sparked strong interest among practitioners and laypeople (Dominus, 2017;Elsesser, 2020;Kluger, 2017;Lebowitz, 2015). ...
... In later studies, researchers compared effects of an upright posture versus a slumped posture on behavior and experience (Riskind & Gotay, 1982;Riskind, 1983Riskind, , 1984). Yet, enormous interest in this field in both academia and the general public emerged after researchers introduced the phenomenon of "power posing" (e.g., assuming an expansive body position, such as by putting one's hands on one's waist and sticking out one's chest, like Superman or Wonder Woman), claiming that brief nonverbal displays of power increased feelings of power, testosterone levels, and risk-taking-and decreased cortisol levels (Carney et al., 2010). High levels of testosterone and low levels of cortisol are linked to fearlessness, risk-taking, and insensitivity to punishment (Mehta et al., 2015;Mehta & Josephs, 2010). ...
... Power poses are characterized by extreme body expansion and high-intensity nonverbal expressions (Carney et al., 2005;Witkower et al., 2020). That is, the torso is pushed out and the arms and legs are spread apart (e.g., Carney et al., 2010;Cuddy et al., 2015;Huang et al., 2011;see Supplemental Appendix A). Upright postures are characterized by vertical extension, lower levels of body expansion, and low-intensity nonverbal expressions (see Supplemental Appendix B). ...
... Amy Cuddy, a social psychologist who became famous after her TED talk went viral, is one example of scientists struggling to defend their research from accusations of misconduct. Cuddy's study about power posing (Carney et al. 2010) was accused for p-hacking 3 as by other researchers, the experiment failed to replicate (Dominus 2017). However, Cuddy stood by her position that she and her team have done a proper and adequate method in which it had gone through a rigorous peer-review process (Dominus 2017). ...
... However, Cuddy stood by her position that she and her team have done a proper and adequate method in which it had gone through a rigorous peer-review process (Dominus 2017). As we know, this case is still debatable (Elsesser 2020), and up until now, the study about power posing (Carney et al. 2010) is still in publication by Psychological Science (i.e., it is not retracted). ...
Article
Full-text available
In academia, plagiarism is considered detrimental to the advancement of sciences, and the plagiarists can be charged with sanctions. However, the plagiarism cases involving three rectors of universities in Indonesia stand out, as they could defend their stand for not committing academic misconduct despite evidence found. By analyzing the three rectors' cases, the present study aims to answer how power relations take a role in plagiarism discourse in Indonesia, particularly in determining what is considered academic misconduct and what is not. By employing critical discourse analysis, we found that when the accusation of plagiarism appears during rectorial elections, the accused could equivocate that the accusation was meant to undermine them as a political opponent. When the accused plagiarists win the election, they have more power to deny and tackle the accusations of plagiarism. The findings indicate that plagiarism issues can be politicized, in which by those in power it can be used as a tool to undermine their political opponents, whereas the accused plagiarists can claim that the actual problem is personal and not about plagiarism. It is also shown that in the real context, whether something is called plagiarism or not is subject to interpretation by those in power. Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10734-022-00875-z.
... Expansive open postures (as opposed to contracted closed postures) correlate with increased testosterone, decreased cortisol, and increased risk-taking behavior. 43 Holding a cup of hot (as opposed to iced) coffee modulates social perception and behavior toward others as warm and friendly. 44 Subjects wearing a white lab coat that was specifically named a doctor's coat (as opposed to a painter's coat) were found to make half as many errors on an attention-demanding task; however, insight problems that require creative thinking were better solved by those who thought they were wearing a painter's coat. ...
... Furthermore, as the client sat in the chair, she was slightly slouched. A possible interpretation was that her slouched posture implied a state of powerlessness instead of empowerment, a state of being ready to react and protect (Carney et al., 2010;Cuddy, 2012;Peper, Lin, et al., 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
Abdominal distress affects many people, and biofeedback training appears to be a useful strategy to reduce symptoms. This essay provides detailed instruction for a first session assessment for a client who has abdominal discomfort (functional abdominal pain). Descriptions include how the physiological recording was used to understand a possible etiology of the illness, to create an explanation that is readily understood by the client, and finally to offer self-regulation suggestions for generalizing learning for clients to better promote health for themselves.
... As for the creation of our stimuli, we first took several photographs of the robot NAOv5 in a neutral setting. In order to depict expansive and constrictive body language in a conceptually valid way, we consulted psychological literature [1,4,10,59], as well as a taxonomy proposed by human-computer interaction scholars [51]. By these means, the following criteria were identified for expansive poses: A wide stance (standing) or spread legs (sitting), hands placed on the hips (standing) or behind the head (sitting), head slightly lifted, and direct eye contact. ...
Article
Full-text available
When interacting with sophisticated digital technologies, people often fall back on the same interaction scripts they apply to the communication with other humans-especially if the technology in question provides strong anthropomorphic cues (e.g., a human-like embodiment). Accordingly, research indicates that observers tend to interpret the body language of social robots in the same way as they would with another human being. Backed by initial evidence, we assumed that a humanoid robot will be considered as more dominant and competent, but also as more eerie and threatening once it strikes a so-called power pose. Moreover, we pursued the research question whether these effects might be accentuated by the robot's body size. To this end, the current study presented 204 participants with pictures of the robot NAO in different poses (expansive vs. constrictive), while also manipulating its height (child-sized vs. adult-sized). Our results show that NAO's posture indeed exerted strong effects on perceptions of dominance and competence. Conversely, participants' threat and eeriness ratings remained statistically independent of the robot's depicted body language. Further, we found that the machine's size did not affect any of the measured interpersonal perceptions in a notable way. The study findings are discussed considering limitations and future research directions.
Article
In principle, successful replications should enhance the credibility of scientific findings, and failed replications should reduce credibility. Yet it is unknown how replication typically affects the influence of research. We analyzed the citation history of 98 articles. Each was published by a selective psychology journal in 2008 and subjected to a replication attempt published in 2015. Relative to successful replications, failed replications reduced citations of replicated studies by only 5% to 9% on average, an amount that did not differ significantly from zero. Less than 3% of articles citing the original studies cited the replication attempt. It does not appear that replication failure much reduced the influence of nonreplicated findings in psychology. To increase the influence of replications, we recommend (a) requiring authors to cite replication studies alongside the individual findings and (b) enhancing reference databases and search engines to give higher priority to replication studies.
Article
The Psychology of Women and Equalities Section (POWES) of the British Psychological Society (BPS) accounts for much of the feminist action in British psychology and beyond. In this qualitative study, we use discursively informed thematic analysis to examine a set of eleven in-depth interviews to explore the everyday experiences of feminists within academic spaces in and around the discipline of psychology in the United Kingdom. Three research questions addressing the boundary between activism and academia; the provision of support; and differing approaches to knowledge production were investigated. Our findings highlight the role of POWES as a feminist community as well as the conceptual importance of notions of home, work, and fun. Moreover, the paper examines the ways traditional conceptions of scientific rigour continue to haunt feminist spaces, as does the invisibility of emotional labour. Overall, our findings indicate that the place of feminist academic communities remains vital to sustain critical thought and action: having an intellectual “home” is pivotal to the survival of feminist psychology as well as feminists in psychology.
Chapter
Kapitel enthält: emotionale, soziale und ethische Aspekte von Berührungen; Placeboeffekte; Embodiment; Haus- und Therapietiere; Einsamkeit. - Abstract: Im medizinischen Kontext können von erforderlichen Berührungen, die einem medizinischen oder pflegerischen Zweck dienen, soziale Berührungen unterschieden werden. Diese, oft spontan auftretenden Berührungen, erfüllen soziale oder emotionale Funktionen. Soziale Berührungen können beruhigend, tröstend, angst-, schmerz- oder stressreduzierend wirken. Es besteht somit die Möglichkeit, soziale Berührungen im medizinischen oder pflegerischen Kontext gezielt zu diesen Zwecken einzusetzen.
Article
Full-text available
Reports 2 experiments that test whether both emotional and nonemotional feelings may be influenced by uninterpreted proprioceptive input. The logic of the procedure was adopted from studies by F. Strack et al (1988), who unobtrusively manipulated people's facial expressions. In the 1st experiment, a functionally equivalent technique was used to vary the posture of the body. Study 1 results revealed that success at an achievement task led to greater feelings of pride if the outcome was received in an upright position rather than in a slumped posture. Study 2 results revealed that nonemotional feelings of effort were influenced by contraction of the forehead muscle (corrugator), and Ss' self-ratings on a trait dimension reflected this experience when the facial contraction was maintained during the recall of behavioral episodes exemplifying this trait. To account for these results, a framework is proposed that draws on a distinction between noetic and experiential representations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Book
The study of nonverbal behavior has substantially grown in importance in social psychology during the past twenty years. In addition, other disciplines are increas­ ingly bringing their unique perspectives to this research area. Investigators from a wide variety of fields such as developmental, clinical, and social psychology, as well as primatology, human ethology, sociology, anthropology, and biology have system­ atically examined nonverbal aspects of behavior. Nowhere in the nonverbal behavior literature has such multidisciplinary concern been more evident than in the study of the communication of power and dominance. Ethological insights that explored nonhuman-human parallels in nonverbal communication provided the impetus for the research of the early 19708. The sociobiological framework stimulated the search for analogous and homologous gestures, expressions, and behavior patterns among various species of primates, including humans. Other lines of research, in contrast to evolutionary-based models, have focused on the importance of human developmental and social contexts in determining behaviors associated with power and dominance. Unfortunately, there has been little in the way of cross-fertilization or integration among these fields. A genuine need has existed for a forum that exam­ ines not only where research on power, dominance, and nonverbal behavior has been, but also where it will likely lead. We thus have two major objectives in this book. One goal is to provide the reader with multidisciplinary, up-to-date literature reviews and research findings.
Chapter
Nonverbal behavior, defined simply, is behavior that is not part of formal, verbal language. In psychological terms, nonverbal behaviors generally refer to facial expressions, body movements, and eye, hand, and feet behaviors that have some significance in social interaction. Philosophers, poets, and writers have long been aware of nonverbal messages—messages communicated without spoken words: “The face is the mirror of the mind and eyes without speaking confess secrets of the heart” (St. Jerome); “Each of our gestures carries the weight of a commitment” (Satre); “For a touch I yield” (Tennyson).
Article
Background: The phenomena of basal hypercortisolism and of dexamethasone resistance have long intrigued biological psychiatrists, and much is still unknown as to the causes and consequences of such adrenocortical hyperactivity in various neuropsychiatric disorders. We have analyzed basal cortisol concentrations and adrenocortical responsiveness to dexamethasone in a population of wild baboons living in a national park in Kenya. We tested whether social subordinance in a primate is associated with dexamethasone resistance. Furthermore, we examined whether individual differences in adrenocortical measurements were predicted by the extent of social affiliation in these animals. Methods: Seventy yellow baboons ( Papio cynocephalus ) were anesthetized and injected with 5 mg of dexamethasone; the cortisol response was monitored for 6 hours. The animals were of both sexes in a range of ages and had known ranks in the dominance hierarchies within their troops. Extensive behavioral data were available for a subset of 12 adult males who were anesthetized under circumstances that also allowed for the determination of basal cortisol concentrations. Results: The socially subordinate baboons were less responsive to dexamethasone than were the dominant ones; as one manifestation of this, postdexamethasone cortisol values were more than 3 times higher in the dozen lowest-ranking animals compared with the dozen highest. In addition, socially isolated males had elevated basal cortisol concentrations and showed a trend toward relative dexamethasone resistance. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that social status and degree of social affilitation can influence adrenocortical profiles; specifically, social subordinance or social isolation were associated in our study with hypercortisolism or feedback resistance.
Article
The hormone testosterone (T) has a central role in recent theories about allocation of status ranks during face-to-face competition. It has been methodologically convenient to test the hypothesized T mechanism in physically taxing athletic contests, where results have been supportive, although their generalizability to normal social competition is questionable. Competition among chess players is a step closer to normal social competition because it does not require physical struggle, and it is the arena for tests of the T mechanism which are reported here. We find that winners of chess tournaments show higher T levels than do losers. Also, in certain circumstances, competitors show rises in T before their games, as if in preparation for the contests. These results generally support recent theories about the role of T in the allocation of status ranks.