Probing the fundamental features of human status psychology

The papers presented in this dissertation aim to refine our understanding of human status psychology. The core of this research is a cross-national dataset documenting the impacts that 240 acts, traits, and events have on men’s and women’s status across 14 countries. In an initial investigation of human status criteria, I found support for several hypotheses about sex differences and similarities across nations using a meta-analytic approach. These findings highlight the multiplicity of characteristics individuals could cultivate in order to attain status. Following up on this initial investigation, I collected supplemental data and employed Bayesian multilevel models to clarify the cognitive foundations of human status hierarchies. I found that cue-based inferences of a person’s willingness and ability to generate benefits strongly predict status allocations around the world, whereas inferences of willingness and ability to inflict costs are comparatively weak predictors of status. This result challenges prominent theories of status allocation, which maintain that cost infliction and benefit generation are both independently viable routes to status. Instead, this finding suggests that the logic of social value primarily regulates human status hierarchies. Finally, I probed the social-cognitive mechanisms associated with hierarchy navigation by examining emotional responses to status changes. I used multilevel models to define the computational specificity and potential adaptive functions of pride and shame. Taken together, the papers presented in this dissertation strengthen the evidence for a species-typical human psychology designed for navigating status hierarchies, while pointing to important future directions for understanding broad individual differences and cultural diversity.Psycholog