Stature signals status: The association of stature, status and perceived dominance – a thought experiment

Abstract

There is a common perception that tall stature results in social dominance. Evidence in meerkats suggests that social dominance itself may be a strong stimulus for growth. Relative size serves as the signal for individuals to induce . We construct a thought experiment to explore the potential consequences of the question: is stature a social signal also in humans? We hypothesize that (1) upward trends in height in the lower social strata are perceived as social challenges yielding similar though attenuated upward trends in the dominant strata, and that (2) democratization, but also periods of political turmoil that facilitate upward mobility of the lower strata, are accompanied by upward trends in height. We reanalyzed large sets of height data of European conscripts born between 1856-1860 and 1976-1980; and annual data of German military conscripts, born between 1965 and 1985, with information on height and school education. Taller stature is associated with higher socioeconomic status. Historic populations show larger height differences between social strata that tend to diminish in the more recent populations. German height data suggest that both democratization, and periods of political turmoil facilitating upward mobility of the lower social strata are accompanied by a general upward height spiral that captures the whole population. We consider stature as a signal. Nutrition, health, general living conditions and care giving are essential prerequisites for growth, yet not to maximize stature, but to allow for its function as a lifelong social signal. Considering stature as a social signal provides an elegant explanation of the rapid height adjustments observed in migrants, of the hitherto unexplained clustering of body height in modern and historic cohorts of military conscripts, and of the parallelism between changes in political conditions, and secular trends in adult human height since the 19 century.

Global effects of income and income inequality on adult height and sexual dimorphism in height

“…Anthropologists know that this was also true for ancient state variables that are associated with physical growth. There is also evidence that the social status differences themselves influence neuroendocrine activity that regulates growth in height (Bogin et al, 2015;Hermanussen and Scheffler, 2016).…”

“…Better living conditions leading to greater stature is important because shorter individuals and communities have, generally, higher risk of heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease, but lower risk for cancer, especially melanoma and cancers of the pancreas, endocrine and nervous systems, ovary, breast, prostate, colorectum, blood and lung (Batty et al, 2009;Maurer, 2010; Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, 2012;Varela-Silva et al, 2016). Shorter height also associates with less education, lower social status, and earnings (Bogin, 1999(Bogin, , 2001Hermanussen and Scheffler, 2016; NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, 2016;Goudet et al, 2016;Varela-Silva et al, 2016). One goal of this article is to contribute a better understanding of the relationship between height, living conditions, and macroeconomic factors.…”

As tall as my peers – similarity in body height between migrants and hosts

“…Koziel & Gomula (2016) showed in 1810 children aged 14 years decreases in height and BMI variance within school classes. Hermanussen & Scheffler (2016) further elaborated on these findings by providing historic evidence that stature may serve as a social signal. From this literature we derive our hypothesis that migrant children adjust their height growth toward the mean of the recipient social network.…”

“…Understanding stature as a social signal we consider the regulation of growth being influenced by social mechanisms (Hermanussen & Scheffler 2016). More simply stated, growth is a process that allows for adjusting individual height toward its relative optimum within the group.…”

“…More recent research finds that social networks influence hormonal activity, including oxytocin and serotonin (Kanat et al 2013;Dölen et al 2013) as well as cortisol and testosterone (Kornienko et al 2014;Kornienko et al 2016;Ponzi et al 2016). How social networks may influence growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor-1 is not well researched, but in view of recent work on body size as an expression of social dominance (Bogin et al 2015;Hermanussen & Scheffler 2016) we discuss evidence supporting the hypothesis that migrant children can adjust in height toward the average height of their recipient social network, or surpass height of their host and donor populations in cases of violent, oppressive or military and colonial migration.…”