Winners, losers, and posers: The effect of power poses on testosterone and risk-taking following competition

Smith, Kristopher M; Apicella, Coren L.

doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2016.11.003

Cited by 31 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, regarding uncertainty on decision tasks, both stress and hormone changes (i.e., T and C) can influence risk-taking behavior in situations of ambiguous uncertainty (Daughters et al, 2013;Lighthall et al, 2009; van den Bos et al, 2009) and risky uncertainty (Apicella et al, 2014;Cano-López, Cano-López, Hidalgo, & González-Bono, 2017;Starcke et al, 2008). However, other investigations found null findings for ambiguous uncertainty (Cano-López et al, 2017) and for risky uncertainty (Pabst, Brand & Wolf, 2013;Smith & Apicella, 2016;Sokol-Hessner, Raio, Gottesman, Lackovic, & Phelps, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From an evolutionary perspective, competition is a social stress situation that has been shaped to achieve status and/or resources (Salvador, 2005;Salvador & Costa, 2009). In this regard, Apicella, Dreber, and Mollerstrom (2014) showed that T changes were positively associated with risk-taking behavior in men, whereas Smith and Apicella (2016) reported that neither T changes nor C changes predicted risk-taking behavior in men after a competitive stressor. Mehta, Mor, Yap, and Prasad (2015) found that C and T changes after a face-to-face negotiation influenced economic decision-making; specifically, higher T and higher C predicted low earnings and a sensation of conflict.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hormonal changes after competition predict sex‐differentiated decision‐making

Alacreu‐Crespo

Costa

Abad‐Tortosa

et al. 2019

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent neuroendocrinology research has pointed out that testosterone (T) and cortisol (C) changes after social interactions can predict risk‐taking behavior in decision‐making, depending on the sex of participants. However, previous research has focused on the effects of the changes in only one hormone, rather than the interaction between them, even though C can suppress T activity. Our aim was to test, in men and women, the role of T changes moderated by C changes after competition in decision‐making. Thus, 48 males and 46 females completed the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) after a laboratory competition or a noncompetitive task (control task). Saliva samples were collected before and after the competition/control task. IGT was employed to measure risk‐taking decision‐making, considering the degree of uncertainty. Our results showed sex‐differentiated effects of T and C changes on risk‐taking behavior. On the one hand, men from both task groups (Competition/Control) who had higher C and T changes after competition showed more risk‐taking decision‐making (higher IG Risk). On the other hand, women from the competitive task who had high C and T showed conservative decision‐making. Therefore, these results show sex‐differentiated decision‐making profiles, which would help to understand how men and women behave after experiencing a competitive social context.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hormonal changes after competition predict sex‐differentiated decision‐making

Alacreu‐Crespo

Costa

Abad‐Tortosa

et al. 2019

Behavioral Decision Making

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These three studies observed either a change only after expansive postures (Bohns & Wiltermuth, 2012;Lee & Schnall, 2014) or no significant effect (Jamnik & Zvelc, 2017). Similarly, only four studies included a control group, and observed a significant difference only for the constrictive posture (Cesario & McDonald, 2013) or no significant effects (Davis et al, 2017;Nielsen, 2017;Smith & Apicella, 2017). Thanks to the reasonably high statistical power and to the within-subject design of the current study, we can be more confident that the observed posture effects did not originate from baseline between-group differences in approach and avoidance tendencies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…Building on theories of embodiment, several studies have indeed examined whether adopting certain body postures influences the individuals' own feelings, moods and behaviour (Duclos et al, 1989;Riskind, 1984;Riskind & Gotay, 1982;Stepper & Strack, 1993). Although the replicability of most studies exploring the impact of expansive and constrictive postures is subject to an on-going debate Smith & Apicella, 2017), there seems to be conclusive evidence for a small effect of adopting expansive or constrictive postures on explicit feelings of power (Gronau et al, 2017). Yet, feelings as well as many other investigated behaviours were assessed using explicit self-reports, which are susceptible to demand effects (Gronau et al, 2017;Jonas et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power posture effects on approach and avoidance decisions in response to social threat

Metzler¹,

Vilarem²,

Petschen³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals’ opportunities for action in threatening social contexts largely depend on their social power. While powerful individuals can afford to confront aggressors and dangers, powerless individuals need others’ support and better avoid direct challenges. Here, we investigated if adopting expansive or constrictive postures, which function as social signals of power, impacts individuals’ approach and avoidance decisions in response to social threat signals using a within-subject design. Overall, participants more often chose to avoid rather than to approach angry individuals, but showed no clear approach or avoidance preference for fearful individuals. Crucially, constrictive posture considerably increased the tendency to avoid angry individuals, whereas expansive postures induced no substantial changes. This suggests that adopting power-related postures can impact action decisions in response to social threat signals. The present results emphasize the social function of power postures and are discussed in the context of the debate on the replicability of power posture effects.

show abstract

“…The effect of expectancy related to future performance on STEM tasks or exams influences posture as well as other neuroendocrine responses. For example, if you feel that you are a "loser," not only might you slouch or collapse your posture, but testosterone levels may also continue to decrease (Smith & Apicella, 2017) and cortisol levels may continue to increase.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Better in Math: How Your Body Posture May Change Stereotype Threat Response

Peper

Harvey

Mason

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates posture on mental math performance. One hundred twenty-five students (M = 23.5 years) participated as part of a class activity. Half of the students sat in an erect position while the other half sat in a slouched position and were asked to mentally subtract 7 serially from 964 for 30 s. They then reversed the positions before repeating the math subtraction task beginning at 834. They rated the math task difficulty on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (extreme). The math test was rated significantly more difficult while sitting slouched (M = 6.2) than while sitting erect (M = 4.

show abstract

Winners, losers, and posers: The effect of power poses on testosterone and risk-taking following competition

Cited by 31 publications

References 60 publications

Hormonal changes after competition predict sex‐differentiated decision‐making

Hormonal changes after competition predict sex‐differentiated decision‐making

Power posture effects on approach and avoidance decisions in response to social threat

Do Better in Math: How Your Body Posture May Change Stereotype Threat Response

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About