A meta-analytic review of the associations of personality, intelligence, and physical size with social status.

IF 17.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY
Psychological bulletin Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-08 DOI:10.1037/bul0000416
Michael P Grosz, Robbie C M van Aert, Mitja D Back
{"title":"A meta-analytic review of the associations of personality, intelligence, and physical size with social status.","authors":"Michael P Grosz, Robbie C M van Aert, Mitja D Back","doi":"10.1037/bul0000416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Theories have proposed diverse reasons for why individual differences such as personality traits lead to social status attainment in face-to-face groups. We integrated these different theoretical standpoints into a model with four paths from individual differences to status: a dominance, a competence, a virtue, and a micropolitics path. To investigate these paths, we meta-analyzed over 100 years of research on bivariate associations of personality traits, cognitive abilities, and physical size with the attainment of status-related outcomes in face-to-face groups (1,064 effects from 276 samples including 56,153 participants). The status-related outcome variables were admiring respect, social influence, popularity (i.e., being liked by others), leadership emergence, and a mixture of outcome variables. The meta-analytic correlations we found were largely in line with the micropolitics path, tentatively in line with the competence and virtue paths, and only partly in line with the dominance path. These findings suggest that status attainment depends not only on the competence and virtue of an individual but also on how individuals can enhance their apparent competence or virtue by behaving assertively, by being extraverted, or through self-monitoring. We also investigated how the relations between individual differences and status-related outcomes were moderated by kind of status-related outcome, nature of the group task, culture (collectivism/individualism), and length of acquaintance. The moderation analysis yielded mixed and inconclusive results. The review ends with directions for research, such as the need to separately assess and study the different status-related outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000416","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Theories have proposed diverse reasons for why individual differences such as personality traits lead to social status attainment in face-to-face groups. We integrated these different theoretical standpoints into a model with four paths from individual differences to status: a dominance, a competence, a virtue, and a micropolitics path. To investigate these paths, we meta-analyzed over 100 years of research on bivariate associations of personality traits, cognitive abilities, and physical size with the attainment of status-related outcomes in face-to-face groups (1,064 effects from 276 samples including 56,153 participants). The status-related outcome variables were admiring respect, social influence, popularity (i.e., being liked by others), leadership emergence, and a mixture of outcome variables. The meta-analytic correlations we found were largely in line with the micropolitics path, tentatively in line with the competence and virtue paths, and only partly in line with the dominance path. These findings suggest that status attainment depends not only on the competence and virtue of an individual but also on how individuals can enhance their apparent competence or virtue by behaving assertively, by being extraverted, or through self-monitoring. We also investigated how the relations between individual differences and status-related outcomes were moderated by kind of status-related outcome, nature of the group task, culture (collectivism/individualism), and length of acquaintance. The moderation analysis yielded mixed and inconclusive results. The review ends with directions for research, such as the need to separately assess and study the different status-related outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

关于性格、智力和体型与社会地位关系的元分析综述。
关于个性特征等个体差异为何会导致在面对面群体中获得社会地位,各种理论提出了不同的原因。我们将这些不同的理论观点整合到一个模型中,该模型包含从个体差异到地位的四条路径:支配力路径、能力路径、美德路径和微观政治路径。为了研究这些路径,我们对 100 多年来关于人格特质、认知能力和体型与在面对面群体中获得地位相关结果的二元关联的研究进行了元分析(来自 276 个样本的 1,064 个效应,包括 56,153 名参与者)。与地位相关的结果变量包括:钦佩尊重、社会影响力、受欢迎程度(即被他人喜欢)、领导力的崛起以及结果变量的混合。我们发现的元分析相关性基本符合微观政治学路径,初步符合能力和美德路径,只有部分符合支配力路径。这些发现表明,地位的获得不仅取决于个人的能力和美德,还取决于个人如何通过自信的行为、外向的性格或自我监督来提高其表面上的能力或美德。我们还研究了个体差异与地位相关结果之间的关系如何受到地位相关结果的种类、群体任务的性质、文化(集体主义/个人主义)和相识时间长短的调节。调节分析的结果好坏参半,没有定论。综述最后提出了研究方向,如需要分别评估和研究不同的地位相关结果。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological bulletin
Psychological bulletin 医学-心理学
CiteScore
33.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Psychological Bulletin publishes syntheses of research in scientific psychology. Research syntheses seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses. A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments: -of the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest; -of critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research; -of important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信