Self-perceived social status: its relation to aggression and
personality traits in two Spanish speaking samples
Abs
tract
.
D
ominance and prestige are two strategies to achieve status in humans. Dominance is the use of threat and
aggression, and prestige is the pursuit of cultural achievement. This research presents a study carried out through self-
report measures with two native Spanish speaking samples from Madrid (Spain) and San José (Costa Rica). Self-perceived
d
ominance and prestige were correlated with dimensions of aggression and the big five personality traits. Results showed
that a component that grouped different aggression subscales and agreeableness was the best predictor of dominance in
samples of men and women of both countries. Prestige was mainly predicted by conscientiousness and extraversion in
b
oth samples and by low hostility and neuroticism but only in Spanish men.
Keywor
d
s.
S
ocial status, prestige, dominance, personality.
Resu
m
e
n
.
Dominancia y prestigio se
h
an propuesto como estrategias para alcanzar estatus en
h
umanos. La
d
ominancia es el uso de amenazas y agresión, y el prestigio es la búsqueda de logros culturales. Esta investigación fue
llevada a cabo utilizando cuestionarios en muestras de habla hispana: Madrid (España) y San José (Costa Rica). La
d
ominancia y el prestigio auto-percibidos fueron correlacionados con dimensiones de la agresión y los cinco grandes
rasgos de personalidad. Un componente que agrupó las subescalas de agresión y la afabilidad fue el me
j
or predictor de la
d
ominancia en ambos sexos de ambos países. El prestigio fue predicho por la escrupulosidad y la extroversión en sendas
muestras y por ba
j
as puntuaciones en hostilidad y neuroticismo en hombres españoles.
P
a
l
a
b
ra
s
c
l
av
e.
Estatus social, prestigio, dominancia, personalidad.
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
http://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/actualidades
ISSN 2215-3535
DOI: http://doi.org/10.15517/ap.v31i123.26441
1
David Monge-López. Universidad Hispanoamericana, UNED, Costa Rica. Dirección postal: Barrio Aranjuez, San José, Costa Rica.
E-mail: davidml79@gmail.com
2
Sara Álvarez-Solas. Universidad Regional Amazónica IKIAM, Tena, Ecuador. E-mail: sarahez61@hotmail.com
David Monge-López
1
Universidad Hispanoamericana, Costa Rica
Sara Álvarez-Solas
2
Universidad Regional Amazónica Ikiam, Ecuador
Estatus social auto-percibido: su relación con la agresión y
rasgos de personalidad en dos muestras hispano-hablantes
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional.
2
Monge-López & Álvarez-Solas
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
2
Introduction
Henrich and Gil-White (2001) developed
a framework about human social status; their
perspective proposed two means of reaching
social positions: dominance and prestige. While
dominance is based on the use of aggression and
intimidation to induce fear, prestige is a product
of the improvement of the quality of information
that has been obtained by cultural learning (see
Krützen et al., 2005; Taylor & Toth, 2011; van
Schaik & Burkart, 2011 about the concept of
cultural learning or cultural transmission). Prestige
is based on the display of skills and knowledge in
different behavioral domains, such strategy leads
to the admiration and respect from others’ point
of view. This perspective can be termed as “dual
strategy theory” (DST).
DST has motivated different projects that
have made progress toward the understanding
of the characteristics of both forms of human
status. Research has been carried out in fields like
personality psychology (Buttermore & Kirkpatrick,
2009), physiological psychology (Johnson, Burk &
Kikpatrick, 2007), mate choice (Snyder, Kirkpatrick
& Barret, 2008), the psychology of emotions
(Cheng, Tracy & Henrich, 2010), group behavior
(Cheng, Tracy, Foulsham, Kingstone & Henrich,
2013; Cheng & Tracy, 2013; 2014) and the study of
social dilemmas in intergroup situations (Halevy,
Chou, Cohen & Livingston, 2012).
Dominance and prestige have also been studied
in indigenous groups and have been related to
different social consequences and biological fitness
indicators, for example both dominance and prestige
have been related too higher nutritional status (von
Rueden, Gurven & Kaplan, 2011). In addition, both
strategies have been also related to higher marital
fertility, lower offspring mortality, and support from
allies in conflicts (von Rueden, Gurven & Kaplan,
2008) and prestige has been related additionally to
community influence and respect in a group while
dominance has been related to fighting ability and
physical size (Reyes-García et al., 2009).
Additionally, in developmental psychology an
independent line of research has reported similar
strategies in behavioral patterns during infancy
and adolescence. Research has shown that children
and teenagers behave using intimidation and
aggression to others or using prosociality and trying
to influence peers, while children use aggressive
behavior in early elementary school years; later,
such tendencies disappear and prosocial strategies
are more important in high school (Hawley, 2002;
Hawley, Little & Pasupathi, 2002; Hawley, Little &
Card, 2008).
Along with the research just described, studies
have also shown that social status is a phenomenon
that links social behavior with biological and
developmental processes. Some authors have argued
that cultural prestige could be considered the most
important pathway to reaching status in modern
environments; further, prestige could be considered
the only certainly relevant in contemporary
societies (Barkow, 1975; Chapais, 2015). From this
perspective, dominance would be used only for
those who have had socialization experiences that
keep such type of strategy active but it would be a
less valuable tendency in adults (Barkow, 1975), or
it would be a behavioral tendency mainly present in
the early development (Hawley, 2002; Hawley, Little
& Card, 2008; Hawley, 2014).
Following the proposal of Henrich & Gil-White
(2001), dominance has been characterized as a
strategy based on the use of aggression, coercion
and intimidation. On the other hand, prestige has
been described as a strategy based on the display of
skills and knowledge. It could be expected that the
self-report of different dimensions of aggressive
behavior would correlate positively with dominance
but not with prestige.
Following the proposal of Buss & Perry (1992),
we consider four dimensions of self-report
aggressive behavior: a) physical aggression: direct
contact to other persons in order to harm them, b)
verbal aggression: direct contact to other persons
using language in order to offend them, c) anger:
Self-perceived social status
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
3
physiological and emotional activation related to
aggression, and d) hostility: feeling of opposition
representing the cognitive component of aggression.
We expect that all four dimensions of aggression
will be positively related to dominance because only
this status-seeking strategy uses aggression to reach
social positions.
As in the case of aggressive behavior, personality
traits could correlate with self-perceived status
strategies. The display of different strategies to
seek social status could be related to specific
psychological profiles that assist behavior in the
objective to reach high positions in social groups;
the recognition of these profiles could help in order
to identify the traits that help in particular pathways
of status-seeking processes.
Taking into account the five-factor model of
personality (Costa & McCrae, 1992) and based on
previous research and theoretical arguments, it is
possible to predict how every personality trait could
correlate to dominance and prestige. As it is widely
known, the five factor model is composed of five
dimensions, a) openness to experience: tendency to
have imagination, preference for variety, curiosity and
aesthetic sensitivity; b) conscientiousness: worrying
about take obligations seriously, to be organized,
systematic and self-disciplined; c) extraversion:
tendency to be outgoing, talkative, socially oriented
and behaviorally energetic; d) agreeableness: to be
kind, sympathetic, warm and cooperative in social
relations; and e) neuroticism: tendency to experience
negative emotions as anxiety, anger, envy, frustration,
sad mood or loneliness
Previous research suggests that openness to
experience and conscientiousness are positively related
to self-perceived prestige, these two personality traits
can assist the gathering of valuable cultural information
(Buttermore & Kirkpatrick, 2009; Cheng, Tracy &
Henrich, 2010). We do not expect any association of
these two traits with dominance.
Past works have also reported a positive association
of extraversion with social status (Anderson et al.,
2001); this seems to be the case for both, dominance
and prestige (Buttermore & Kirkpatrick, 2009). Based
on these findings we expect a positive correlation of
self-perceived status strategies with extraversion.
While it is expected that both dominance and
prestige are positively related to extraversion, a
different relationship is expected between status
strategies and agreeableness. This trait has been defined
as a tendency to be kind, generous, sympathetic and
warm with others (Costa & McCrae, 1991; Thompson,
2008). This description seems clearly incompatible with
dominance, but it could be a desirable trait that would
enhance a strategy based on cultural prestige. Thus, we
expect a negative correlation between self-perceived
dominance and agreeableness but a positive association
of this personality trait with self-perceived prestige.
Finally, the possible relation of self-perceived
status strategies with neuroticism deserves detailed
consideration. A previous study has reported that
people who seek prestige are usually viewed as likable,
but those who adopt a dominance strategy are not
liked by their peers (Cheng, et al, 2013). In addition,
Buttermore & Kirkpatrick (2009) found a negative
relation between neuroticism and self-perceived
prestige and a positive one between emotional stability
and self-perceived prestige. This evidence suggests
that neuroticism presents an inverse correlation with
self-perceived prestige. Possibly, low levels of self-
perceived prestige lead to the experience of negative
emotionality and ceteris paribus the two traits are
negatively related.
Additionally, when considering the association of
neuroticism and self-perceived dominance, there are
two possibilities. The first one follows an argument
presented in Buttermore and Kirkpatrick (2009); these
authors proposed a negative association between
neuroticism and self-perceived dominance because
self-perception of social status of any type would
protect against neurotic experiences. An alternative
possibility is that there will be a positive relation
between self-perceived dominance and neuroticism
4
Monge-López & Álvarez-Solas
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
4
because dominance is a trait that is rejected by others
and this rejection could lead to the experience of
negative emotionality (Cheng, et al. 2013).
Relatively few empirical studies show advance-
ments regarding how different psychological traits
are related to status strategies in different cultural
contexts. To date, there are no studies that explore
the hypotheses exposed in the previous paragraphs
in Spanish-speaking countries. The purpose of the
present study was to analyze the association between
two self-perceived social status strategies, prestige
and dominance, with different dimensions of ag-
gression and the big five personality traits. In short,
our study was guided by the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: There will be positive associations between
self-perceived dominance and different dimensions of
aggression, but different expressions of aggression will
not be related with self-perceived prestige.
Hypothesis 2: There will be positive associations of
openness to experience and conscientiousness with
self-perceived prestige, but these personality traits will
not be related with self-perceived dominance.
Hypothesis 3: There will be a positive correlation
of extraversion both with self-perceived dominance
and prestige.
Hypothesis 4: There will be a negative association
between agreeableness and self-perceived dominance,
but a positive one with self-perceived prestige.
Hypothesis 5: There will be a negative correlation
between neuroticism and self-perceived prestige.
Moreover, there are two perspectives while considering
the relation between neuroticism and self-perceived
dominance: one predicts a negative association between
these variables; the other predicts a positive one.
Additionally, we do not expect differences either by
sex or by country in the associations that were predicted.
Method
The current study was correlational, developed
with two Spanish speaking samples from two
different countries.
Participants
Two samples of university students and graduates
were studied. One of the samples was from Madrid,
Spain (n = 234), 112 participants (47.86%) of the
sample were men. Their mean age was 23 years and
11 months with a standard deviation of 33.54 months.
In terms of nationality, 96.6% were Spanish and 3.4%
were from other nationalities.
The other sample was from San José, Costa Rica (n
= 216), 110 participants (50.93%) were men. Their age
had a mean of 23 years and 8 months, and a standard
deviation of 34.44 months. Participants were from
Costa Rica in 98.5% of the cases.
Measures
The study used the following measures.
-Self-perceived social status scale (SSSS). The Spanish
version (Monge-López & Escorial, 2015) of this
scale originally developed by Buttermore (2006), is
composed of 11 items (5 evaluate dominance and
6 evaluate prestige). It excludes reverse coded items
presented in the original; previous work showed that
they present low correlations with their subscales. The
subscales presented adequate reliability both in Spain
(dominance = .82 and prestige = .78) and in Costa
Rica (dominance = .80 and prestige = .71).
-Aggression questionnaire. The Spanish version
(Andreu, Peña & Graña, 2002) of this measure
originally developed by Buss and Perry (1992), is
composed of 29 items and includes 4 subscales:
physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger and
hostility. With the exception of verbal aggression
subscales, it presented good reliability in Spain
(physical aggression = .83, verbal aggression =
.63, anger= .74 and hostility = .74), and in
Costa Rica all subscales presented good reliability
(physical aggression = .75, verbal aggression =
.70, anger = .73 and hostility = .74).
-NEO-FFI. A Spanish version (Cordero, Pamos &
Seisdedos, 1999) of this measure of the five-factor
model of personality (Costa & McCrae, 1992) is
composed of 60 items, and it includes 5 subscales:
Self-perceived social status
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
5
openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion,
agreeableness and neuroticism. Reliabilities of the
subscales were good both in Spain (openness =
.81; conscientiousness = .86; extraversion = .80,
agreeableness = .76 and neuroticism = .87) and
in Costa Rica (openness = .75; conscientiousness
= .85; extraversion = .79, agreeableness = .73 and
neuroticism = .85).
Procedure
A website was designed to include the different
questionnaires of the study. Participants could read
the objective of the research and ethical statements
before beginning to complete the measures. To
collect data, professors and students distributed
the website link in class and other contexts; the
participants completed the measures at the time
and place they preferred. Participants were not
reimbursed in any way. Data were gathered in a
MySQL database and exported to Excel to prepare
for the analysis.
Data analysis
The mean, standard deviation and coefficient of
variation were obtained for measures of dominance
and prestige. In addition, the correlation between
two self-reported status strategies was obtained.
We also tested the reliability of all subscales using
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. In cases of an alpha
coefficient below 0.7, the subscale was maintained
for analysis but the following correlations were
corrected for attenuation (Sijtsma, 2009).
Pearson correlations were obtained to test the
hypothesis. Those variables that presented at least
a moderate zero order correlation (above .3) with
dominance or prestige, were selected for regression
analysis. In order to avoid collinearity problems
between predictors, a principal component analysis
was performed (PCA) and selected every component
as a predictor in the regression model (Liu, Kuang,
Gong & Hou, 2003).
The PCA used a Varimax rotation and conserved
components whose eigenvalues were greater than
1. Correlational and regression analyses were
performed for every subsample according sex
and country; regression used a robust standard
error procedure. Procedures were executed using
R-Commander (Arriaza et al, 2008; Crawley, 2005).
Ethical statement
As described previously, the website included a first
page in which the participants were informed about
the research objectives and confidentiality. Voluntary
participation was assured. Formal procedures for the
approval of the study were followed in the university
where it was developed.
Results
Table 1 includes means and standard deviations of
all variables.
Table 2 presents the results of correlations of
the dominance and prestige subscales with different
variables. A significant correlation between dominance
and prestige was obtained in Spain, but it was of low
magnitude (r = .18, p = .01). In Costa Rica, dominance
and prestige did not present a significant correlation (r
= .08, n.s. p = .228).
When considering the results presented in Table
2 and following the hypotheses proposed, all the
predictions were partially supported, in most cases
there is evidence of the expected relations in some
subsamples but not in others. The only prediction that
was supported in men and women from both countries
was the negative correlation between neuroticism and
self-perceived prestige (see “Discussion” section for a
complete consideration of these results).
When considering every subsample according to sex
and country that presented more than one predictor
variable that correlated above .3 with the criterion
variable, effectively, there was collinearity in all cases and
PCA extracted only one component in all cases too. That
was the case for self-perceived dominance (eigenvalue
= 2.49) and self-perceived prestige (eigenvalue = 2.57)
in men from Spain and for self-perceived dominance
6
Monge-López & Álvarez-Solas
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
6
Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations of All Measures
Means Standard deviations
Spain Costa Rica Spain Costa Rica
Self-perceived dominance 16.08 17.66 5.82 6.41
Self-perceived prestige 30.7 32.44 4.62 4.79
Physical aggression 10.74 11.79 7.13 6.35
Verbal aggression 7.29 8.15 3.77 4.58
Anger 11.53 12.03 5.14 5.48
Hostility 14.15 14.73 5.52 5.84
Openness to experience 44.25 43.11 7.55 6.80
Conscientiousness 42.41 43.95 8.03 7.71
Extroversion 40.42 40.58 7.02 7.95
Agreeableness 44.73 42.76 6.44 6.83
Neuroticism 35.22 34.94 9.14 8.68
Table 2
Pearson Zero Order Correlations for Dominance and Prestige with Different Variables According Sex and Country
Madrid, Spain San José, Costa Rica
Dominance Prestige Dominance Prestige
MWMWMWMW
Physical aggression .31** .21* .05 - .07 .35*** .26** - .03 .06
Verbal aggression .30**
( .42***)
.26**
( .36**)
- .13
(- .18)
- .004
(- .006)
.50*** .43*** .14 .17
Anger .30** .35*** - .13 - .02 .41*** .29** - .13 .01
Hostility .32** .14 - .32** - .18* .21* .20* - .16 - .17
Openness .07 .08 .25** .08 .04 .10 .26** .17
Conscient - .11 - .01 .41** .31*** - .17 - .19* .30** .18
Extraversion - .01 .13 .37** .18 .09 - .06 .37*** .13
Agreeableness - .65*** - .42*** - .06 .03 - .62*** - .58*** .11 .01
Neurosis .27** - .04 - .46** - .27** .09 .11 - .23* - .21*
Note. M: Men. W: Women. *p = .05, **p = .01, ***p = .001 Correlations corrected for attenuation for verbal aggression are presented
in parenthesis. Numbers in bold represent those correlations that were at least of a moderate magnitude.
Self-perceived social status
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
7
in women from Spain (eigenvalue = 1.78). Same
situation occurred in Costa Rica when considering
self-perceived dominance (eigenvalue = 2.51) and
self-perceived prestige (eigenvalue = 1.39) in men and
self-perceived dominance in women (eigenvalue =
1.46). All eigenvalues reported correspond to the only
component extracted.
Table 3 presents the results of the principal
component regression analysis for every subsample
considering sex and country of the participants.
All predictors in all cases maintain a significant
relation with the criterion variable; in all cases, the
predictor was the component extracted in the PCA.
Only when self-perceived prestige was the criterion
variable in women from Spain the analysis had just
one variable as a predictor and PCA was not executed.
In this case, the relation between the predictor and
the criterion was still significant. In the case of self-
perceived prestige in women from Costa Rica, there
were no predictors because no variable correlated
above 0.3 and regression analysis was not executed.
Discussion
The present study established the associations
between self-perceived status strategies and some
psychological traits, dimensions of self-reported
aggression as developed by Buss & Perry (1992)
and dimensions of personality traits as presented in
the big five model (Costa & McCrae, 1992).The first
hypothesis proposed that all dimensions of aggression
would correlate positively with dominance in all
subsamples, but different expressions of aggression
would not correlate with prestige. Results showed that
almost all dimensions of aggression were positively
related with dominance in all cases, and there were
Table 3
Principal Component Regression Predicting Dominance and Prestige in Different Subsamples
Criterion Predictor Proportion of variance* β** R
2
, F (df)**
Dominance Men
Spain
(All Aggression,-Agreeable.) .49 .54 R
2
= .293
F (1, 110) = 45.49
Dominance Women
Spain
(-Anger, -Verb. Aggr.
Agreeable.)
.59 - .44 R
2
= .198
F (1,120) = 29.54
Prestige Men
Spain
(Hostil. Neurot.–
Conscien., -Extrav.)
.64 - .48 R
2
= .233
F (1, 110) = 33.49
Prestige Women
Spain
Conscientiousness*** .10
+
.31 R
2
= .098
F (1, 120) = 13.11
Dominance Men
Costa Rica
(Phys.agg, Verb. agg,
Ang., -Agreeable.)
.63 - .59 R
2
= .351
F (1, 108) = 58.33
Dominance Women
Costa Rica
(-Verb. aggr., Agreeable.) .73 .59 R
2
= .343
F (1, 104) = 54.42
Prestige Men
Costa Rica
(Conscient., Extravers.) .69 .41 R
2
= .167
F (1, 108) = 21.63
Prestige Women
Costa Rica
Non variable correlates above .3
Note. Predictor represents the component identified in a PCA for every subsample. In all cases PCA extracted only one component.
A negative sign indicates a variable that had a negative loading in the component.*Proportion of variance explained by the component.
**All beta coefficients and F values were significant, p = .001. ***PCA was not executed because only this variable correlates above .3
with the criterion variable.
+
r
2
value related to the variable that correlates above .3 with the criterion variable.
8
Monge-López & Álvarez-Solas
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
no associations between prestige and dimensions of
aggression as well.
The only unexpected correlation was the negative
association between prestige and hostility that was
obtained in men and women from Spain. This result was
especially important in the case of men when compared
to other subsamples. Furthermore, it seems dependent
on the context where data were collected because there
was no association between these variables in Costa
Rica. The result could be also related with the fact
commented ahead, the negative relation between self-
perceived prestige and neuroticism. Hostility could be
a part of such trait too; in some cases, hostility could
appear as a manifestation of a neurotic reaction when
self-perceived prestige is diminished.
The second hypothesis predicted positive
associations of openness and conscientiousness with
self-perceived prestige. This hypothesis was supported
in the samples of men of both countries; but in
women from Spain there was only a positive relation
between conscientiousness and prestige and women
from Costa Rica did not present any association
between these variables. These results suggest that the
relations depending on sex and the cultural context
where the study was carried out. The relation proposed
by the hypothesis was mainly present in men, maybe
men would obtain most social benefits and positive
consequences from the expression of openness and
conscientiousness and this lead to an improvement of
their own cultural prestige.
The third hypothesis proposed a positive correlation
with extraversion both with dominance and prestige.
These predictions were not supported; only a positive
relation between extraversion and prestige in men of
both countries existed. As in the case of openness
and conscientiousness in Costa Rica, it seems that this
association depends on the sex of the participants, and
it is not the generalized phenomenon that was expected.
As in the previous result too, it seems that men are the
ones that can obtain positive consequences from the
expression of social valuable personality traits and this
enhances their self-image of prestige.
The next hypothesis predicted a negative association
between agreeableness and self-perceived dominance,
and a positive relation between such personality trait
and self-perceived prestige. The negative relation
between agreeableness and dominance was in fact
obtained. In all subsamples of both sexes and
countries, it was one of the most generalized correla-
tions obtained between a personality trait and one of
the self-perceived status strategies.
On the other hand, the idea that agreeableness
would correlate with prestige was not supported in
any case; curiously in this case the positive relation
between the valuable personality trait (agreeableness)
and self-perceived prestige was not obtained. This
study found no evidence that the phenomenon that
occurred with openness, conscientiousness and
extraversion could occur with agreeableness. Future
studies could try to reply to these results and try to
explain why it happened.
The last hypothesis proposed an inverse relation
between neuroticism and self-perceived prestige; this
prediction was completely supported in all subsamples
of both sexes and countries; along with the negative
association between dominance and agreeableness was
the most supported prediction.
Last hypothesis also proposed two possible
perspectives about the relation between neuroticism
and self-perceived dominance; one predicts a negative
correlation between these variables and the other
predicts a positive one. Results showed only one
positive relation between neuroticism and dominance
in men from Spain; however, the magnitude of
this association was low. None of the perspectives
proposed received strong and consistent support; it
seems that dominance is not consistently related with
neuroticism at all.
Correlations obtained were of low and moderate
magnitude in the majority of cases, only in the case
of the inverse associations between dominance and
agreeableness in men from both countries strong
relations were obtained. In this type of studies
moderate associations are usually the norm; it is quite
Self-perceived social status
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
9
rare to obtain strong associations (above 0.6) and they
usually represent variables that are the same construct
(Lodico, Spaulding & Voegtle, 2006).
Regression analyses showed that only one
component was enough to establish a predictor in all
cases. In the case of dominance and in male samples,
such predictor includes all aggression dimensions with
the exception of hostility in Costa Rica, as well as a
negative relation with agreeableness. In women, the
component that served as a predictor also includes
a negative relation with agreeableness, but it only
includes anger and verbal aggression in Spanish
women and verbal aggression in Costa Rican women.
This result can be interpreted as evidence of sex
differences in aggression as predictors of dominance.
Such differences have been previously reported in
research, typically direct forms of aggression (physical
aggression) are used mainly by men, and there are
fewer differences or no differences at all in dimensions
like verbal aggression or anger (see Archer, 2004).
When considering prestige, conscientiousness was
a predictor in men from both countries and in women
from Spain. In male samples of both countries,
extraversion joined conscientiousness as a personality
trait that predicted the self-perception of prestige.
In Spanish men, such positive personality traits seem
to inhibit neuroticism and hostility and show how
in some contexts self-perceived prestige helps the
psychological health of the individual.
Taking into account other results, descriptive
characteristics of the SSSS’ subscales have shown that
prestige always presents a higher mean and a lower
standard deviation when compared to dominance;
these characteristics seem to be generalized according
to previous studies in other cultural contexts
(Buttermore & Kirkpatrick, 2009; Johnson, Burk &
Kirkpatrick, 2007).
People tend to be biased toward a high self-
perception of prestige while the self-perception of
dominance is a more variable phenomenon. Sustaining
a bias of high self-perceived prestige could be related
to the fact that this status seeking strategy has very
positive social consequences. For example, Cheng,
et al (2013) found that people that were considered
prestigious were evaluated as agreeable people, this did
not occur with people that were considered dominant.
Cheng, Tracy & Henrich (2010) related cultural
prestige with authentic pride, a self-conscious emotion
associated with self-confidence, agreeableness, work
capability, energy, kindness and self-esteem (Hart &
Matsuba, 2007; Tracy, Cheng, Robins & Trzesniewski,
2009; Tracy & Robins, 2007). Our results seem to
support this tendency, where both samples from
Spain and Costa Rica showed high self-perception of
prestige, possibly to obtain such direct benefits.
An important feature of these studies is that they
have been developed with self-perception measures.
This implies that we do not have information about
whether aggression and personality traits are related
with dominance and prestige when such variables are
evaluated by different means such as ratings from
other’s point of view or observational methods.
Future studies must consider alternative ways to
measure these variables and asses the correlations
between them. Achieving social status is an important
motivation in human behavior. Positive outcomes
related to possessing a favorable social position have
probably sustained these behaviors in the evolutionary
past and in present environments. Understanding both
strategies of obtaining status and the consequences
of acquiring and failing to sustain social positions
may help to improve our knowledge related to the
regulation of social behavior.
References
Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D. & Kring, A.
M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of
personality and social attractiveness in social groups.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 116-132.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.116
Andreu, J. M., Peña, M. E., & Graña, J. L. (2002).
Adaptación psicométrica de la versión española del
cuestionario de agresión. Psicothema, 14, 476-482.
Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real
world settings: a meta-analytic review. Review of
10
Monge-López & Álvarez-Solas
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
General Psychology, 8, 291-322. doi: 10.1037/1089-
2680.8.4.291
Arriaza, A. J., Fernández, F., López, M. A., Muñoz, M.,
Pérez, S., & Sánchez, A. (2008). Estadística básica con
R y R-Commander. Cádiz, España: Universidad de
Cádiz.
Barkow, J. (1975). Prestige and culture: a biosocial
interpretation. Current Anthropology, 16, 553-572.
doi: 10.1086/201619
Buss, A., & Perry, M. (1992). The aggression
questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
63, 452-459. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.3.452
Buttermore, N. (2006). Distinguishing Dominance and
Prestige: Validation of a self-report scale. Poster presented
at the annual meeting of the Human Behavior and
Evolution Society, Philadelphia, PA.
Buttermore, N., & Kirkpatrick, L. (2009). Distinguishing
Prestige and Dominance: Two Distinct Pathways to Status.
Unpublished research project. University of Michigan.
Chapais, B. (2015). Competence and the evolutionary
origins of status and power in humans. Human
Nature, 26, 9227. doi: 10.1007/s12110-015-9227-6
Cheng, J. T., & Tracy, J. L. (2013). The impact of
wealth on prestige and dominance rank
relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 24, 102-108. doi:
10.1080/1047840X.2013.792576
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 J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy & C. Anderson (Eds.).
The Psychology of Social Status (pp. 3-28) New York:
Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0867-7
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. doi:
10.1037/a0030398
Cheng, J, Tracy, J., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride,
personality and the evolutionary foundations of
human social status. Evolution & Human Behavior, 31,
334-347. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.02.004
Cordero, A., Pamos, A., & Seisdedos, N. (1999).
Inventario de personalidad NEO Revisado (NEO PI-R)
e Inventario NEO Reducido de cinco factores (NEO-FFI).
Adaptación española. Madrid, España: TEA.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1991). Facet scales for
agreeableness and conscientiousness: a revisión
of the NEO personality inventory. Personality and
Individual Differences, 12, 888. doi: 10.1016/0191-
8869(91)90177-D
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO
Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-
Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Crawley, M. J. (2005). Statistics. An Introduction using R.
West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
Halevy, N., Chou, E., Cohen, T. R., & Livingston,
R. W. (2012). Status conferral in intergroup social
dilemmas: behavioral antecedents and consequences
of prestige and dominance. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 102, 351-366. doi: 10.1037/
a0025515
Hawley, P. H. (2002). Social dominance and
prosocial and coercive strategies of resource
control in preschoolers. International Journal
of Behavioral Development, 26, 167-176. doi:
10.1080/01650250042000726
Hawley, P. H. (2014). The duality of human
nature: coercion and prosociality in youths’
hierarchy ascension and social success. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 433-438. doi:
10.1177/0963721414548417
Hawley, P. H; Little, T. D., & Card, N. A. (2008). The myth
of the alpha male: a new look at dominance-related
beliefs and behaviors among adolescent males and
females. International Journal of Behavioral Development,
32, 76-88. doi: 10.1177/0165025407084054
Hawley, P. H.; Little, T. D., & Pasupathi, M. (2002).
Winning friends and influencing peers: strategies
Self-perceived social status
Actualidades en Psicología, 31(123), 2017, 1-11
11
of peer influence in late childhood. International
Journal of Behavioral Development, 5, 466-474. doi:
10.1080/01650250143000427
Henrich, J. & Gil-White, F. (2001). The evolution of
prestige: freely conferred status as a mechanism for
enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission.
Evolution & Human Behavior, 22, 1-32. doi: 10.1016/
S1090-5138(00)00071-4
Johnson, R. T., Burk, J. A., & Kirkpatrick, L. A.
(2007). Dominance and prestige as differential
predictors of aggression and testosterone levels in
men. Evolution & Human Behavior, 28, 345-351. doi:
10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.04.003
Krützen, M., Mann, J., Heithaus, M. R., Connor, R.
C., Bejder, L., & Sherwin, W. B. (2005). Cultural
transmission of tool use in bottlenose dolphins.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America, 102, 8939-8943. doi:
10.1073/pnas.0500232102
Liu, R. X., Kuang, J., Gong, Q., & Hou, X. L. (2003).
Principal components regression analysis with
SPSS. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine,
71, 141-147. doi: 10.1016/S0169-2607(02)00058-5
Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H.
(2006). Methods in Educational Research: From Theory to
Practice. San Francisco, California: Wiley.
Monge-López, D., & Escorial, S. (2015). Traducción y
análisis psicométrico de la Escala de Estatus Social
Auto percibido en dos muestras hispanohablantes.
Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 33, 233-249. doi:
10.12804/apl33.02.2015.05
Reyes-Garcia, V., Molina, J. L., McDade, T. W.,
Tanner, S. N., Huanca, T., & Leonard, W. R. (2009).
Inequality in social rank and adult nutritional status:
Evidence from a small-scale society in the Bolivian
Amazon. Social Science & Medicine, 69, 571-578. doi:
10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.05.039
Sijtsma, K. (2009). On the use, the misuse, and the very
limited usefulness of Cronbach’s alpha. Psychometrika,
74, 107 – 120. doi: 10.1007/s11336-008-9101-0
Snyder, J. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Barrett, H. C.
(2008). The dominance dilemma: Do women really
prefer dominant mates? Personal Relationships, 15,
425-444. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2008.00208.x
Taylor, M. J., & Toth, C. A. (2011). Cultural transmission.
In Goldstein, S. & Naglieri, J. A. (Eds.) Encyclopedia
of Child Behavior and Development (pp. 448-451) New
York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-79061-
9_755
Thompson, E. R. (2008). Development and validation
of an international English big-five mini-markers.
Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 542-548. doi:
10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.013
Tracy, J. L., Cheng, J. T., Robins, R. W., & Trzesniewski,
K. (2009). Authentic and hubristic pride: the affective
core of self-esteem and narcissism. Self and Identity,
8, 196-213. doi: 10.1080/15298860802505053
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2007). The psychological
structure of pride: A tale of two facets. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 506-525. doi:
0.1037/0022-3514.92.3.506
Von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2008).
The multiple dimensions of male social status in an
Amazonian society. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29,
402-415. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.05.001
Von Rueden, C., Gurven, M., & Kaplan, H. (2011). Why
do men seek status? Fitness payoffs to dominance
and prestige. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278,
2223-2232. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2145
Van Schaik, C. P., & Burkart, J. M. (2011). Social
learning and evolution: the cultural intelligence
hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of Royal Society
of London Biological Sciences, 366, 1008-1016. doi:
10.1098/rstb.2010.0304
Recibido: 03 de octubre de 2016
Aceptado: 05 de setiembre de 2017
