Acceso usuarios
David M. Buss, Patrick K. Durkee, Todd K. Shackelford, Brian F. Bowdle, David P. Schmitt, Gary L. Brase, Jae C. Choe, Irina Trofimova
[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology on Sep 7 2020 (see record 2020-68801-001). In the original article, the third sentence in the Content level subsection in the Status Criteria More Central to Women section of the Results should appear instead as Fidelity, chastity/purity, and long-term mating success increase women’s status more than men’s. A coding error in Figure 7 for Dishonoring Family appeared. The corrected Figure 7 now appears.] Social status is a central and universal feature of our highly social species. Reproductively relevant resources, including food, territory, mating opportunities, powerful coalitional alliances, and group-provided health care, flow to those high in status and trickle only slowly to those low in status. Despite its importance and centrality to human social group living, the scientific understanding of status contains a large gap in knowledge—the precise criteria by which individuals are accorded high or low status in the eyes of their group members. It is not known whether there exist universal status criteria, nor the degree to which status criteria vary across cultures. Also unknown is whether status criteria are sex differentiated, and the degree of cross-cultural variability and consistency of sex-differentiated status criteria. The current article investigates status criteria across 14 countries (N = 2,751). Results provide the first systematic documentation of potentially universal and sex-differentiated status criteria. Discussion outlines important next steps in understanding the psychology of status. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
