Elsevier

Evolution and Human Behavior

Volume 31, Issue 5, September 2010, Pages 334-347
Evolution and Human Behavior

Original Article
Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.02.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Based on evolutionary logic, Henrich and Gil-White [Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 165–196] distinguished between two routes to attaining social status in human societies: dominance, based on intimidation, and prestige, based on the possession of skills or expertise. Independently, emotion researchers Tracy and Robins [Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(3), 506–525] demonstrated two distinct forms of pride: hubristic and authentic. Bridging these two lines of research, this paper examines whether hubristic and authentic pride, respectively, may be part of the affective-motivational suite of psychological adaptations underpinning the status-obtaining strategies of dominance and prestige. Support for this hypothesis emerged from two studies employing self-reports (Study 1), and self-and peer-reports of group members on collegiate athletic teams (Study 2). Results from both studies showed that hubristic pride is associated with dominance, whereas authentic pride is associated with prestige. Moreover, the two facets of pride are part of a larger suite of distinctive psychological traits uniquely associated with dominance or prestige. Specifically, dominance is positively associated with traits such as narcissism, aggression, and disagreeableness, whereas prestige is positively associated with traits such as genuine self-esteem, agreeableness, conscientiousness, achievement, advice-giving, and prosociality. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for our understanding of the evolutionary origins of pride and social status, and the interrelations among emotion, personality, and status attainment.

Section snippets

Pride and the evolution of social status

All human societies reveal status differences among individuals that influence patterns of conflict, resource allocation, and mating (Fried, 1967), and often facilitate coordination on group tasks (Bales, 1950, Berger et al., 1980, Ellis, 1995). Even the most egalitarian of human foragers reveal such status differences, despite the frequent presence of social norms that partially suppress them (Boehm, 1993, Lee, 1979; see discussion in Henrich and Gil-White 2001). High-status individuals tend

Two evolved status strategies: prestige and dominance

Henrich and Gil-White (2001) proposed an evolutionary model articulating two distinct paths to attaining status in human societies: dominance and prestige. Dominance refers to the use of intimidation and coercion to attain a social status based largely on the effective induction of fear. In the dominance hierarchies that characterize many nonhuman species, social rank is determined on the basis of agonistic encounters (Trivers, 1985). In humans, dominance is not limited to physical conflict,

Participants and procedure

One hundred ninety-one undergraduates (70% female) completed an on-line questionnaire in exchange for course credit.

Measures

Trait levels of dominance and prestige (αs=.83 and .80, respectively) were assessed using newly developed self-report scales, based on previous work by Buttermore (2006) (see Supplementary Materials for scale construction). Trait hubristic and authentic pride (αs=.89 and .87, respectively) were assessed with the 14-item Hubristic and Authentic Pride-Proneness Scales (Tracy &

Study 2

To capture the perceived distribution of status and abilities, which are more deterministic of status dynamics than individuals' own perceptions of their social rank, in Study 2 we asked peers to rate the status and abilities of group members. In previous studies that have measured group members' perceptions of the distribution of dominance and prestige within the group (e.g., Reyes-Garcia et al., 2008, von Rueden et al., 2008), both forms of status were assessed via single items, which, for

General discussion

The goal of this research was to extend prior theoretical work hypothesizing two distinct avenues of human status, one rooted in dominance and the other in prestige—by deriving and testing predictions about the emotions, personality traits, social tendencies, and competencies that underpin each of these status strategies. As a result, this research establishes a tentative link between two previously independent research programs: the evolutionary foundations of human status and the psychology

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Social Sciences Research Council of Canada (File #s 766-2007-0814 and 410-2006-1593) and the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research [CI-SCH-01862 (07-1)] for supporting this research. We also thank Jeremy Biesanz for his helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript and assistance with statistical analyses.

References (77)

  • von RuedenC. et al.

    Multiple dimensions of male social statuses in an Amazonian society

    Evolution and Human Behavior

    (2008)
  • AmesD.R. et al.

    What breaks a leader: The curvilinear relation between assertiveness and leadership

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2007)
  • AndersonC. et al.

    The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2002)
  • AndersonC. et al.

    Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2009)
  • AndersonC. et al.

    Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2001)
  • AndersonC. et al.

    Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2006)
  • Ashton-James, C. E., & Tracy, J. L. (2009). Pride and prejudice: The distinct effects of authentic and hubristic pride...
  • BalesR.F.

    Interaction Process Analysis

    (1950)
  • BarkowJ.H.

    Prestige and culture: A biosocial interpretation

    Current Anthropology

    (1975)
  • BergerJ. et al.

    Status organizing processes

    Annual Review of Sociology

    (1980)
  • BaumeisterR. et al.

    Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: The dark side of high self-esteem

    Psychological Review

    (1996)
  • BoehmC.

    Egalitarian society and reverse dominance hierarchy

    Current Anthropology

    (1993)
  • BrunellA.B. et al.

    Leader emergence: The case of the narcissistic leader

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (2008)
  • BrykA.S. et al.

    Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods

    (1992)
  • BussA.H. et al.

    The aggression questionnaire

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1992)
  • BushmanB. et al.

    Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to violence?

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1998)
  • ButtermoreN.

    Distinguishing dominance and prestige: Validation of a self-report scale

  • ChanceM.R.A. et al.

    Social groups of monkeys, apes and man

    (1970)
  • CosmidesL. et al.

    Evolutionary psychology and the emotions

  • DeYoungC.G. et al.

    Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2007)
  • DonnellanM. et al.

    Low self-esteem is related to aggression, antisocial behavior, and delinquency

    Psychological Science

    (2005)
  • DweckC.S.

    Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development

    (1999)
  • FriedM.H.

    The evolution of political society: An essay in political anthropology

    (1967)
  • HardyC.L. et al.

    Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis

    Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

    (2006)
  • Harms, P. D., Wood, D., & Roberts, B. W. (2009). The role of self-enhancement in leadershipappraisals, performance...
  • HartD. et al.

    The development of pride and moral life

  • HenrichJ.

    Why big men are generous

  • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (in press). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain...
  • Cited by (475)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text