Torrance, Jaimie Stephen (2020) Social perceptions of men’s dominance and variations in men’s intrasexual competitiveness. PhD thesis. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/81980/ Copyright and moral rights for this work are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This work cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Enlighten: Theses https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] Social Perceptions of Men’s Dominance and Variations in Men’s Intrasexual Competitiveness Jaimie Stephen Torrance MSc. Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Psychology College of Science and Engineering University of Glasgow October 2020 2 Abstract Dominance plays a central role in human social interaction. Over the years, researchers have learned a lot about how men’s dominance is perceived by others, including that people use a variety of perceptual cues when judging men’s dominance and that these judgements are typically consistent across observers. However, questions remain concerning what external factors can influence a person’s perceptions of other’s dominance, and what factors affect individual differences in dominance and competitiveness. This thesis will review the current literature on dominance in men, before presenting three empirical chapters aimed at addressing gaps in the current literature. The first empirical chapter investigates the effects of testosterone and cortisol, on male intrasexual competitiveness, a key dominance behaviour. The study uses a longitudinal design to examine natural fluctuations in hormone levels over time. The study found no evidence of either a within-subject or between subject effect of testosterone, cortisol or their interaction, on intrasexual competitiveness. The second empirical chapter investigated regional variation in sensitivity to cues of dominance across US states. Despite strong theoretical predictions, the results show no compelling evidence that regional variation in population sex ratio influence sensitivity to cues of dominance. The final empirical chapter investigated the influence of transient cues, specifically head orientation on perceptions of dominance and trustworthiness. The results show that while tilting one’s head down does reliably increase perceptions of dominance and decrease perceptions of trustworthiness, it appears that cue does not have downstream context contingent effects for leadership judgements. 3 Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................... 2 List of Tables ................................................................................ 5 List of Figures ............................................................................... 6 Preface ....................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgement .......................................................................... 8 Author’s Declaration ....................................................................... 9 Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................. 10 1.1 Why Dominance and Status Matter ...................................................................... 11 1.1.1 Status and social hierarchies .......................................................................... 11 1.1.2 What is dominance?....................................................................................... 12 1.2 The Importance of Dominance Cues ..................................................................... 15 1.3 What are the cues to dominance? ........................................................................ 16 1.3.1 Facial cues ...................................................................................................... 16 1.3.2 Body cues ....................................................................................................... 21 1.3.3 Vocal cues ....................................................................................................... 23 1.3.4 Olfactory cues ................................................................................................ 24 1.3.5 Transient cues ................................................................................................ 25 1.3.6 Are these judgments accurate? ..................................................................... 26 1.4 What are the consequences of dominance perceptions? .................................... 28 1.4.1 Dominance perceptions and mating opportunities ....................................... 28 1.4.2 Dominance perceptions and status opportunities ........................................ 30 1.5 What factors influence perceptions of dominance? ............................................. 33 1.5.1 Individual differences ..................................................................................... 33 1.5.2 External Factors .............................................................................................. 34 1.6 What influences dominance behaviour and competition? ................................... 38 1.6.1 Hormonal factors influencing dominance and competition .......................... 38 1.6.2 Environmental factors influencing dominance and competition .................. 47 1.7 The Current Studies ............................................................................................... 51 Chapter 2 No evidence for associations between men’s salivary testosterone and responses on the Intrasexual Competitiveness Scale ........................... 52 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 53 2.2 Methods ................................................................................................................ 54 2.2.1 Participants .................................................................................................... 54 2.2.2 Procedure ....................................................................................................... 54 2.2.3 Assays ............................................................................................................. 55 4 2.2.4 Analyses.......................................................................................................... 56 2.3 Results ................................................................................................................... 56 2.4 Discussion .............................................................................................................. 57 Chapter 3 Does adult sex ratio predict regional variation in facial dominance perceptions? Evidence from an analysis of US states ................................ 59 3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 60 3.2 Methods ................................................................................................................ 62 3.2.1 Participants .................................................................................................... 62 3.2.2 Face stimuli .................................................................................................... 62 3.2.3 Procedure ....................................................................................................... 63 3.2.4 Adult sex ratio ................................................................................................ 64 3.3 Results ................................................................................................................... 64 3.4 Discussion .............................................................................................................. 66 Chapter 4 Evidence head tilt has dissociable effects on dominance and trustworthiness judgments, but does have not category-contingent effects on hypothetical leadership judgments ..................................................... 68 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 69 4.2 Study 1 ................................................................................................................... 71 4.2.1 Methods ......................................................................................................... 71 4.2.2 Results ............................................................................................................ 72 4.2.3 Additional analyses of Study 1 ....................................................................... 75 4.3 Study 2 ................................................................................................................... 75 4.3.1 Methods ......................................................................................................... 76 4.3.2 Results ............................................................................................................ 76 4.3.3 Additional analyses of Study 2 ....................................................................... 79 4.4 Discussion .............................................................................................................