Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T17:09:01.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - An Evolutionary Perspective on the Role of Status in Close Relationships

from Part I - Power in Close Relationships: Theoretical Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2019

By
Virgil Zeigler-Hill  and
Gillian A. McCabe
Edited by
Christopher R. Agnew  and
Jennifer J. Harman
Christopher R. Agnew
Affiliation:
Purdue University, Indiana
Jennifer J. Harman
Affiliation:
Colorado State University
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Power in Close Relationships , pp. 9 - 27
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, A. (1939). Social interest. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
Adler, N. E., Epel, E. S., Castellazzo, G., & Ickovics, J. R. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy White women. Health Psychology, 19, 586–592.Google Scholar
Altmann, J., Alberts, S. C., Haines, S. A., Dubach, J., Muruth, P., Coote, T., … & Bruford, M. W. (1996). Behavior predicts genetic structure in a wild primate group. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93, 5795–5801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 574–601.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009a). Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 491–503.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009b). The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 295–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, C., Kraus, M. W., Galinsky, A. D., & Keltner, D. (2012). The local-ladder effect: Social status and subjective well-being. Psychological Science, 23, 764–771.Google Scholar
Anderson, C., Srivastava, S., Beer, J. S., Spataro, S. E., & Chatman, J. A. (2006). Knowing your place: Self-perceptions of status in face-to-face groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1094–1110.Google Scholar
Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C., Dufner, M., Gerlach, T. M., Rauthmann, J. F., & Denissen, J. J. (2013). Narcissistic admiration and rivalry: Disentangling the bright and dark sides of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 1013–1037.Google Scholar
Barkow, J. H. (1975). Prestige and culture: A biosocial interpretation. Current Anthropology, 16, 553–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkow, J. H. (1989). Darwin, sex, and status: Biological approaches to mind and culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Berg, S. J., & Wynne-Edwards, K. E. (2001). Changes in testosterone, cortisol, and estradiol levels in men becoming fathers. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 76, 582–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berger, J., Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M. Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37, 241–255.Google Scholar
Bettencourt, B. A., & Miller, N. (1996). Sex differences in aggression as a function of provocation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422–447.Google Scholar
Betzig, L. L. (1986). Despotism and differential reproduction: A Darwinian view of history. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine.Google Scholar
Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Booth, A., & Dabbs, J. M. (1993). Testosterone and men's marriages. Social Forces, 72, 463–477.Google Scholar
Boulton, M. J., & Smith, P. K. (1990) Affective bias in children's perceptions of dominance relationships. Child Development, 61, 221–229.Google Scholar
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Brown, D. (1991). Human universals. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Buckingham, G., DeBruine, L. M., Little, A. C., Welling, L. L., Conway, C. A., Tiddeman, B. P., & Jones, B. C. (2006). Visual adaptation to masculine and feminine faces influences generalized preferences and perceptions of trustworthiness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulger, J., & Hamilton, W. J. (1987). Rank and density correlates of inclusive fitness measures in a natural Chacma baboon (Papio ursinus) troop. International Journal of Primatology, 8, 635–650.Google Scholar
Burnham, T. C., Chapman, J. C. F., Gray, P. B., McIntyre, M., Lipson, S. F., & Ellison, P. T. (2003). Men in committed, romantic relationships have lower testosterone. Hormones and Behavior, 44, 119–122.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1994). The strategies of human mating. American Scientist, 82, 238–249.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2015). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind, 5th edn. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Duntley, J. D. (2006). The evolution of aggression. In Schaller, M., Kenrick, D. T., & Simpson, J. A. (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 263–286). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.Google Scholar
Cashdan, E. (1998). Smiles, speech, and body posture: How women and men display sociometric status and power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 22, 209–228.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2014). Toward a unified science of hierarchy: Dominance and prestige are two fundamental pathways to human social rank. In Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Anderson, C. (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 3–27). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 334–347.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. (2013). Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 103–125.Google Scholar
Cummins, D. (2005). Dominance, status, and hierarchies. In Buss, D. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 676–697). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Dawood, S., Dowgwillo, E. A., Wu, L. Z., & Pincus, A. L. (2018). Contemporary integrative interpersonal theory of personality. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences (pp. 171–202). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
de Kwaadsteniet, E. W., & van Dijk, E. (2010). Social status as a cue for tacit coordination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 515–524.Google Scholar
de Waal, F. B. M. (1982). Chimpanzee politics. London, UK: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Dodge, K. A., Price, J. M., Bachorowski, J. A., & Newman, J. P. (1990). Hostile attribution biases in severely aggressive adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 99, 385–392.Google Scholar
Edelstein, R. S., van Anders, S. M., Chopik, W. J., Goldey, K. L., & Wardecker, B. M. (2014). Dyadic associations between testosterone and relationship quality in couples. Hormones and Behavior, 65, 401–407.Google Scholar
Egan, V., & Angus, S. (2004). Is social dominance a sex-specific strategy for infidelity? Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 575–586.Google Scholar
Eibl-Eibesfelt, I. (1961). The fighting behavior of animals. Scientific American, 205, 112–121.Google Scholar
Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31–41.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T. (2010). Interpersonal stratification: Status, power, and subordination. In Fiske, S. T., Lindzey, G., & Gilbert, D. T. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed. pp. 941–982). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Fleming, A., Corter, C., Stallings, J., & Steiner, M. (2002). Testosterone and prolactin are associated with emotional responses to infant cries in new fathers. Hormones and Behavior, 42, 399–413.Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., Thomas, G., & Giles, L. (1999). Ideals in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 72–89.Google Scholar
Foa, E. B., & Foa, U. G. (1980). Resource theory of social exchange. In Thibaut, J. W., Spence, J. T., & Carson, R. C. (Eds.), Contemporary Topics in Social Psychology (pp. 99–131). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Forrest, M. S., & Hokanson, J. E. (1975). Depression and autonomic arousal reduction accompanying self-punitive behavior. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 84, 346–357.Google Scholar
Fournier, M. A. (2009). Adolescent hierarchy formation and the social competition theory of depression. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 1144–1172.Google Scholar
Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the right pond: Human behavior and the quest for status. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
French, J. R. P. Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In Cartwright, D. (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.Google Scholar
Glutton-Brock, T. H., & Vincent, A. C. (1991). Sexual selection and the potential reproductive rates of males and females. Nature, 351, 58–60.Google Scholar
Goldhamer, H., & Shils, E. A. (1939). Types of power and status. American Journal of Sociology, 45, 171–182.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Kahlenberg, S. M., Barrett, E. S., Lipson, S. F., & Ellison, P. T. (2002). Marriage and fatherhood are associated with lower testosterone in males. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 193–201.Google Scholar
Gray, P. B., Chapman, J. F., Burnham, T. C., Mcintyre, M. H., Lipson, S. F., & Ellison, P. T. (2004). Human male pair bonding and testosterone. Human Nature, 15, 119–131.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J., & Ornstein, S. (1983). High status job title compensation for underpayment: A test of equity theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 285–297.Google Scholar
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Gangestad, S. W., Perea, E. F., Shapiro, J. R., & Kenrick, D. T. (2009). Aggress to impress: Hostility as an evolved context-dependent strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 980–994.Google Scholar
Hawley, P. H. (1999). The ontogenesis of social dominance: A strategy-based evolutionary perspective. Developmental Review, 19, 97–132.Google Scholar
Hawley, P. H. (2002). Social dominance and prosocial and coercive strategies of resource control in preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26, 167–176.Google Scholar
Hawley, P. H., & Bower, A. R. (2018). Social hierarchies. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences: Volume 3. Applications of personality and individual differences (pp. 235–252). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of Prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 165–196.Google Scholar
Hogan, R. (1982). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In Page, M. M. (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation. Personality: Current theory and research (pp. 55–89). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Hogan, R., & Blickle, G. (2018). Socioanalytic theory: Basic concepts, supporting evidence, and practical implications. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences: Volume 1. The science of personality and individual differences (pp. 110–129). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Graziano, W. G., & West, S. G. (1995). Dominance, prosocial orientation, and female preferences: Do nice guys really finish last? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 427–440.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. T., Burk, J. A., & Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2007). Dominance and prestige as differential predictors of aggression and testosterone in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 345–351.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 765–780.Google Scholar
Kokko, H., Brooks, R., Jennions, M. D., & Morley, J. (2003). The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 270, 653–664.Google Scholar
Kruger, D. J. (2006). Male facial masculinity influences attributions of personality and reproductive strategy. Personal Relationships, 13, 451–463.Google Scholar
Kruger, D. J., & Fitzgerald, C. J. (2011). Reproductive strategies and relationship preferences associated with prestigious and dominant men. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 365–369.Google Scholar
Kyl-Heku, L. M., & Buss, D. M. (1996). Tactics as units of analysis in personality psychology: An illustration using tactics of hierarchy negotiation. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 497–517.Google Scholar
Lange, J., Blatz, L., & Crusius, J. (2018). Dispositional envy: A conceptual review. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences (pp. 424–440). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Le Boeuf, B. L., & Reiter, J. (1988). Lifetime reproductive success in Northern Elephant seals. In Clutton-Brock, T. H. (Ed.), Reproductive success (pp. 344–362). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Leary, M. R., Jongman-Sereno, K. P., & Diebels, K. J. (2014). The pursuit of status: A self-presentational perspective on the quest for social value. In Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Anderson, C. (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 159–178). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Lee, M. T., & Ofshe, R. (1981). The impact of behavioral style and status characteristics on social influence: A test of two competing theories. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 73–82.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York, NY: Harpers.Google Scholar
Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.Google Scholar
Mahadevan, N., Gregg, A. P., Sedikides, C., & De Waal-Andrews, W. G. (2016). Winners, losers, insiders, and outsiders: Comparing hierometer and sociometer theories of self-regard. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 334.Google Scholar
Mascaro, O., & Csibra, G. (2014). Human infants’ learning of social structures the case of dominance hierarchy. Psychological Science, 25, 250–255.Google Scholar
Mazur, A. (1973). A cross-species comparison of status in small established groups. American Sociological Review, 38, 513–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mazur, A. (1985). A biosocial model of status in face-to-face primate groups. Social Forces, 64, 377–402.Google Scholar
Mazur, A., & Michalek, J. (1998). Marriage, divorce, male testosterone. Social Forces, 77, 315–330.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stories. Review of General Psychology, 5, 100–122.Google Scholar
Miller, D. T. (2001). Disrespect and the experience of injustice. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 527–553.Google Scholar
Murdock, G. P. (1949). Social structure. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, T., & Bales, R. F. (1955). Family, socialization and interaction process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Pérusse, D. (1993). Cultural and reproductive success in industrial societies: Testing the relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 267–283.Google Scholar
Pérusse, D. (1994). Mate choice in modern societies: Testing evolutionary hypotheses with behavioral data. Human Nature, 5, 255–278.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (2003). The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
Poole, J. H. (1989). Mate guarding, reproductive success and female choice in African elephants. Animal Behaviour, 37, 842–849.Google Scholar
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.Google Scholar
Redfield, R. (1960). How society operates. In Shapiro, H. L. (Ed.), Man, culture, and society (pp. 345–368). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ronay, R., Greenaway, K., Anicich, E. M., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). The path to glory is paved with hierarchy when hierarchical differentiation increases group effectiveness. Psychological Science, 23, 669–677.Google Scholar
Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629–645.Google Scholar
Sadalla, E. K., Kenrick, D. T., & Vershure, B. (1987). Dominance and heterosexual attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 730–738.Google Scholar
Sapolsky, R. M. (2005). The influence of social hierarchy on primate health. Science, 308, 648–652.Google Scholar
Schjelderup-Ebbe, T. (1922). Beitrage zur sozialpsychologie des Haushuhns [Contributions the social psychology of domestic chickens]. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 88, 225–252.Google Scholar
Shariff, A. F., & Tracy, J. L. (2009). Knowing who's boss: Implicit perceptions of status from the nonverbal expression of pride. Emotion, 9, 631–639.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Barrett, H. C. (2008). The dominance dilemma: Do women really prefer dominant mates? Personal Relationships, 15, 425–444.Google Scholar
Storey, A. E., Walsh, C. J., Quinton, R. L., & Wynne-Edwards, K. E. (2000). Hormonal correlates of paternal responsiveness in new and expectant fathers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 79–95.Google Scholar
Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 159–163.Google Scholar
Tay, L., & Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 354–365.Google Scholar
Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Thomsen, L., Frankenhuis, W. E., Ingold-Smith, M., & Carey, S. (2011). Big and mighty: Preverbal infants mentally represent social dominance. Science, 331, 477–480.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. M., & Levy, G. D. (1990). Effects of potential partners’ physical attractiveness and socioeconomic status on sexuality and partner selection. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 149–164.Google Scholar
Tracy, J. L., Robins, R. W., & Lagattuta, K. H. (2005). Can children recognize pride? Emotion, 5, 251–257.Google Scholar
Tracy, J. L., Shariff, A. F., & Cheng, J. T. (2010). A naturalist's view of pride. Emotion Review, 2, 163–177.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell, B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136–179). Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherton.Google Scholar
Trivers, R. (1985). Social evolution. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
van Anders, S. M., & Watson, N. V. (2006). Relationship status and testosterone in North American heterosexual and non-heterosexual men and women: Cross-sectional and longitudinal data. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 31, 715–723.Google Scholar
von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2008). The multiple dimensions of male social status in an Amazonian society. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 402–415.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Zeigler-Hill, V., & Highfill, L. (2017). The interpersonal circumplex: A complementary approach for understanding animal personality. In Vonk, J., Weiss, A., & Kuczaj, S. (Eds.), Personality in non-human animals (pp. 39–53). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Zeigler-Hill, V., & Myers, E. M. (2009). Is high self-esteem a path to the White House? The implicit theory of self-esteem and the willingness to vote for presidential candidates. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 14–19.Google Scholar
Zeigler-Hill, V., & Myers, E. M. (2011). An implicit theory of self-esteem: The consequences of perceived self-esteem for romantic desirability. Evolutionary Psychology, 9, 147–180.Google Scholar
Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L. L. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (2015). How can an understanding of evolutionary psychology contribute to social psychology? In Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L. L. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on social psychology (pp. 3–12). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Zerjal, T., Xue, Y., Bertorelle, G., Wells, R. S., Bao, W., Zhu, S., … & Li, P. (2003). The genetic legacy of the Mongols. American Journal of Human Genetics, 72, 717–721.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×