- Tiedens, L. Z. & Fragale, A. R. (2003). Power moves: Complementarity in submissive and dominant nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 558-568.
- Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1989). Human Ethology. New York: Aldine de Gruyter
- Ellyson, S. L. & Dovidio, J. F. (1985). Power, dominance, and nonverbal behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag.
- Mazur, A. (2005). Biosociology of Dominance and Deference. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Center for Entrepreneurial Studies
- Center for Global Business and the Economy
- Center for Leadership Development and Research
- Center for Social Innovation
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Helen K. Chang, 650-723-3358, Fax: 650-725-6750
Is Chest Beating as Good for People as It Is for Primates?
March 2007
STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS—Social hierarchies and dominance displays have a valuable place in negotiating cooperation, status, and paths to power, said Lara Tiedens, associate professor of organizational behavior, speaking before a full house on March 13.
Almost all species have behaviors that are associated with status acquisition, Tiedens told an alumni audience attending a Lifelong Learning program sponsored by the School's Alumni Association. "In animal societies and organizations, hierarchies are a way of facilitating cooperation and coordination." Similarly, human hierarchies depend on dominant behaviors to make decisions, distribute power, and claim resources. While they may not display the classic dominance mode of chest beating seen in chimpanzees, for instance, humans too have ways of exerting influence to acquire and maintain status.
People engage in dominance behavior all the time, said Tiedens, starting with natural or inflated attempts to use body size and space to look larger and more powerful. People who are tall and big have an obvious advantage. "But it's not just our natural body size, it's how people take up more space that conveys dominance," she said. "We have all had experience seeing someone in a group who stands out, who seems more compelling, more able to get what they want—in ways that may not have anything to do with their position."
What gives them this edge? According to Tiedens, the answer lies in visual and verbal clues that convey dominant behavior:
- Open posture and the appearance of height
- Willingness to gaze directly at others, speak loudly in a deep or low voice, and interrupt frequently
- Use of strong, hard gestures
- Standing or leaning in close, reducing interpersonal space
Exerting dominance delivers interpersonal benefits. "When people engage in dominance behavior, others see them as smarter and more competent," Tiedens said. Dominance, in effect, communicates confidence. "The person who displays dominance is seen as being more of the decision-maker and go-to person in their organization—deserving of a higher position and socioeconomic status. We think of these people as deserving even more status… not only do they have it, but they should have more."
The dominant person is also viewed as being more influential, Tiedens said. "Arguments made in the context of dominance displays are believed more, agreed with more, and impact others' behavior more."
In studies examining gender influences, men and women must act in subtly different ways to achieve the same end. Men—conditioned to display more dominance than women—not surprisingly emerge as leaders and accrue more benefits in power, prestige, rewards, and status. When women display dominance, they too can gain the same advancement opportunity, said Tiedens, particularly if they are effective in conveying dominance non-verbally, and softening the impact verbally. "For women, all the variation comes in how they modulate themselves." When assertive speech is paired with a concern for the relationship and a sense of liking people, women are less likely to suffer a backlash than if they behave in a more traditionally male mode.
Despite all the outward benefits, dominance displays are not cost free, nor should they always be employed as a key strategy, cautioned Tiedens. "Dominating people are perceived as less nice, less likeable, and less warm." Moreover, meeting dominance with dominance—as opposed to submission—can be a risky strategy, she said. "If you are stuck on one side or the other, you may not be able to get the best possible outcome or value in a negotiation."
Tiedens admits she gets accused of being a little evil for studying the role of hierarchies and dominant behavior—and for the recommendations she makes. In self-defense, she says, "This sorting-out behavior is going on between people all the time, and the pernicious effects occur because we don't talk about it. Once it becomes an explicit part of a relationship, we have a lot more control over how it plays out and the associated benefits."
Tiedens teaches about interpersonal and team dynamics, the effects of emotions, and negotiations in the Stanford Business School's MBA, PhD, and executive programs. She specializes in researching the psychology of social hierarchies, and the social context of emotion.
—April Neilson