Sizing up the threat: The envisioned physical formidability of terrorists tracks their leaders' failures and successes

Cognition

Volumn 127, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 46-56

  Holbrook, Colin ^a   Fessler, Daniel M T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Coalitional psychology; Conceptual metaphor; Formidability; Intergroup conflict; Threat detection

Indexed keywords

ARMY; ARTICLE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LEADERSHIP; PERSONAL APPEARANCE; PHYLOGENY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TERRORISM; THREAT; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GROUP PROCESSES; HUMANS; LEADERSHIP; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIAL PERCEPTION; SOMATOTYPES; TERRORISM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84872374836     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Archer J. The behavioral biology of aggression 1988, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
2. Archer J., Thanzami V.L. The relation between physical aggression, size and strength, among a sample of young Indian men. Personality and Individual Differences 2007, 43:627-633.
3. Barsalou L.W. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 2008, 59:617-645.
4. Boroditsky L., Ramscar M. The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science 2002, 13:185-188.
5. Buss A.H., Perry M.P. The aggression questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 63:452-459.
6. Clark J. Authentic and hubristic pride as serial homologues: The same but different. Emotion Review 2010, 2:397-398.
7. Duguid M.M., Goncalo J.A. Living large: The powerful overestimate their own height. Psychological Science 2012, 23:36-40.
8. Felson R.B. Big people hit little people: Sex differences in physical power and interpersonal violence. Criminology 1996, 34:433-452.
9. Fessler, D.M.T., & Holbrook, C. (in press). Friends shrink foes: The presence of comrades decreases the envisioned physical formidability of an opponent. Psychological Science.
10. Fessler D.M.T., Holbrook C., Snyder J.K. Weapons make the man (larger): Formidability is represented as size and strength in humans. PLoS ONE 2012, 7(4):e32751. 10.1371/journal.pone.0032751.
11. Frederick, D. A. & Peplau, L.A. (2007, January). The UCLA body matrices II: Computer-generated images of men and women varying in body fat and muscularity/breast size to assess body satisfaction and preferences. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.
12. Gentner D., Gentner D. Flowing waters and teeming crowds: mental models of electricity. Mental models 1983, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. D. Gentner, A. Stevens (Eds.).
13. George D., Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 2003, Allyn & Bacon, Boston. 4th ed.
14. Hess N., Helfrecht C., Hagen E., Sell A., Hewlett B. Interpersonal aggression among Aka hunter-gatherers of the central African Republic. Human Nature 2010, 21:330-354.
15. Huddy L., Khatib N. American patriotism, national identity, and political involvement. American Journal of Political Science 2007, 51:63-77.
16. Johnson M. The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason 1987, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
17. Kelly R. The evolution of lethal intergroup violence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2005, 102:24-29.
18. Lakoff G. The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image schemas?. Cognitive Linguistics 1990, 1:39-74.
19. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by 1980, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
20. Obama, B. H. (2011, May 2). Obama's remarks on bin Laden's killing. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/world/middleeast/02obama-text.html?pagewanted=all.
21. Preacher K.J., Hayes A.F. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods 2008, 40:879-891.
22. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes 1991, Academic Press, San Diego. J.P. Robinson, L.S. Wrightsman, F.M. Andrews (Eds.).
23. Schubert T. Your highness: Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2005, 89:1-21.
24. Schubert T.W., Waldzus S., Giessner S.R. Control over the association of power and size. Social Cognition 2009, 27:1-19.
25. Sell A., Tooby J., Cosmides L. Formidability and the logic of human anger. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2009, 106:15073-15078.
26. Thibodeau P.H., Boroditsky L. Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphors in reasoning. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e16782. 10.1371/journal.pone.0016782.
27. Wrangham R.W., Peterson D. Demonic males: Apes and the origins of human violence 1996, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
28. Yap, A., Mason, M. F., & Ames, D. R. (2012). The powerful size others down: The link between power and estimates of others' size. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
29. Zanolie K., van Dantzig S., Boot I., Wijnen J., Schubert T.W., Giessner S.R., et al. Mighty metaphors: Behavioral and ERP evidence that power shifts attention on a vertical dimension. Brain and Cognition 2012, 78:50-58.