Categorizing human physique is nothing new. For instance, decades ago, William Sheldon categorized bodies into endomorphic, mesomorphic, and ectomorphic. Neither is the assumption that body types and personalities are linked. Sheldon went a step further and tried to prove, using questionable methods, that one could reliably predict personality and character based on body shape.
Regardless of whether an actual relationship between personality and
appearance exists, there may be a link between a target’s body shape and
people’s first impressions of the target individual. In an article, published in the December 2018 issue of Psychological Science, Hu and colleagues discuss people’s “shape-to-trait inferences from bodies,”
suggesting that these inferences “reflect the valence and agency of
traits as well as nuanced personality features related to the Big Five
domains of extraversion, conscientiousness, and agreeableness.”1Body shape and personality: Methods
Participants were 76 undergraduate students (17 men; average age, 20
years) from The University of Texas at Dallas. Stimuli comprised random
computer generated bodies (70 males, 70 females), in neutral standing
poses; these images were generated using the skinned multi-person linear
model, which is based on the Civilian American and European Surface
Anthropometry Resource (CAESAR) data set. See video below.
The stimuli also included a list of traits—based on the Big Five, or the five-factor model of personality (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism,
and openness to experience). The final list included 30 terms divided
into the five personality categories. Each of the five domains contained
six positive and negative personality traits; for example, neuroticism
included the three positive traits of calm, easy-going, and
self-confident; and the three negative traits of irritable, anxious, and moody.
For each trial, participants saw two views of a computer-generated
body (from front, and 45-degree angle), along with the trait list; they
then decided whether any of the 30 traits applied to the body. This
procedure was repeated until all bodies were rated.
Body shape and personality: Results
Researchers visualized the results separately for male and female
bodies. For both men and women, one axis of body-trait space was related
to weight. In general, heavier bodies were linked with more negative
terms, and skinnier bodies with more positive ones.
Body weight also corresponded with conscientiousness-related traits.
Namely, heavier bodies were more likely to be judged as lazy,
disorganized, and careless; slimmer bodies as careful and
self-disciplined. The authors speculate that the observed link may be
explained by how conscientiousness influences body weight via lifestyle
choices. For example, disciplined and careful individuals are expected
to exercise more and watch what they eat.
The vertical axis of body-trait space separated traits according to
agency, with more agentic personality traits (e.g., extraverted,
dominant, quarrelsome) in the upper half and more passive ones (e.g., shy, dependable, trustworthy) in the lower half. Patterns involving this axis appeared more complex and gender-dependent.
Overall, more classically masculine (i.e. wider shoulders) and
classically feminine shapes (i.e. pear-shaped) were associated with
greater agency; more rectangular bodies were linked with greater
passivity.
When examining the Big Five, the following patterns emerged:
Bodies of seemingly reserved and passive women were less curvy and
more rectangular and heavy; extraverted women, in contrast, had trimmer
and more pear-shaped bodies. Bodies of passive men were more heavy and
rectangular compared to those of extraverted men—which were trimmer,
with wider shoulders and an “inverted-triangle shape.”
Almost the opposite pattern emerged for neuroticism and
agreeableness. Negative traits for both neuroticism and agreeableness
correlated with “bottom-heavy, powerful-looking figures with short legs”
in women, and with broad shoulders in men. In contrast, less neurotic
and more trusting men and women had a more rectangular shape.
Patterns for openness were more complex and difficult to interpret, so they will not be discussed here.
Concluding thoughts on first impressions and body shapes
We must exercise care in interpreting the results, as the study
reviewed here had several limitations (e.g., representativeness of the
study’s participants, the target bodies in the CAESAR database, and
neutral standing pose).
With these limitations in mind, this investigation provides
preliminary evidence that individuals reliably infer personality traits
and form first impressions based on body shapes, especially when “we
have nothing but appearance to rely on.”1 These
included negative assumptions about heavier bodies (e.g., careless,
lazy) and positive ones about thinner bodies (e.g., disciplined).
Rectangular bodies were judged as being more reserved, shy, passive,
easygoing, dependable, and trustworthy. Classically feminine
(pear-shaped) and masculine (wide shouldered) bodies were judged as
having greater agency, being more extraverted (e.g., dominant,
enthusiastic), irritable, stubborn, and quarrelsome.
ABOUT AUTHOR
Arash Emamzadeh attended the University of British Columbia in Canada, where he studied genetics and psychology. He has also done graduate work in clinical psychology and neuropsychology in U.S.
No comments:
Post a Comment