Status-impact assessment: is accuracy linked with status motivations?

Abstract

Status hierarchies are ubiquitous across cultures and have been over deep time. Position in hierarchies shows important links with fitness outcomes. Consequently, humans should possess psychological adaptations for navigating the adaptive challenges posed by living in hierarchically organized groups. One hypothesized adaptation functions to assess, track, and store the status impacts of different acts, characteristics, and events in order to guide hierarchy navigation. Although this status-impact assessment system is expected to be universal, there are several ways in which differences in assessment accuracy could arise. This variation may link to broader individual difference constructs. In a preregistered study with samples from India (N = 815) and the USA (N = 822), we sought to examine how individual differences in the accuracy of status-impact assessments covaries with status motivations and personality. In both countries, greater overall status-impact assessment accuracy was associated with higher status motivations, as well as higher standing on two broad personality constructs: Honesty-Humility and Conscientiousness. These findings help map broad personality constructs onto variation in the functioning of specific cognitive mechanisms and contribute to an evolutionary understanding of individual differences.