Does posture matter when it comes to confidence? Does it matter when it comes to perception? If you’ve seen the movie “The Cooler,” then you know that Hollywood has weighed in on the subject. In that movie, the character played by William H. Macy is the Cooler, sent in by casino moguls to depress a winner simply by standing next to him or her. In other words, if a gambler is lucky enough to get on a winning streak, then Mr. Macy’s presence nearby is enough to kill that streak.
Could this scenario be true? Macy plays the part to perfection, with slumped shoulders, a hangdog look, and defeatism oozing out of every pore. When he stands next to the (temporary) winners, it’s hilarious and sad to see his cosmic loser status rubbing off on the heretofore excited hot handers.
The movie is worth watching for the insights it gives into body language, especially for those who aren’t used to watching out for it. But I suspect it’s based on shaky casino lore. The stat experts tell us that there’s no such thing as a hot hand, either in gambling or basketball. That’s just our human super-ability to recognize patterns in the world around us, some true, some not.
The psychology is a little stronger. We have mirror neurons that respond to the emotions around us, firing off the same emotions in our heads. We leak emotions to each other. But leaking emotions – depressing the people around you, as in Macy’s case – would not affect the outcome of the cards or dice, and, in any case, runs don’t happen.
So it’s a good story, but not much more.
You may recall from an English Literature course you took in high school or college that the art and social critic John Ruskin described the human tendency to generalize emotions, not only to other people, but to the world around us, as the “pathetic fallacy.” So, when we’re feeling blue, the clouds look sullen and the sunset dire.
Ruskin was trying to restrain the sentimental Victorian writers of his day, but he was also pointing to a larger human failing. We do project, generalize, and assume that the rest of the world feels the way we do, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
But in this particular case, how you’re feeling does matter to, at least, the people around you. And your posture does signal how you feel. Those mirror neurons are real, and measurable, and we do leak emotions to each other.
So while the science doesn’t back up the changes in hormones that Amy Cuddy found in her popular Wonder-Woman-power-pose studies, she is absolutely right to the extent that standing confidently does make you subjectively feel more confident. And you look more confident to the people around you.
If you’re angry, or happy, or depressed, you’ll influence the feelings of people around you as well. Your posture, therefore, is an important piece of the puzzle of establishing the mood of the room you’re in. It’s why we catch a “vibe,” or we have groupthink, or a group of people gets enthusiastic about a particular idea and then seems to fail utterly in trying to get the rest of the organization just as excited. Emotions fade. Postures change. People move on.
Now a recent study comes along that finds that the simple act of sitting up straight gives you a better mood, higher self-esteem, and greater enthusiasm, where slumped shoulders give you more fear, hostility, nervousness, passivity, sleepiness, and sluggishness.
It’s important to understand the deeper reason for posture affecting mood. Our unconscious minds create our moods for the most part – we fear, love, lust, hunger, yearn, enthuse, and so on, unconsciously first – and then we act on those moods, intents and decisions. The physical realization of the intent comes second. And only third do we become consciously aware of our intent – through our bodily manifestation of that emotion, decision, or feeling. That’s counter-intuitive, but the brain science bears it out.
Posture is important because through posture we find out what we believe, feel, and decide. The conscious conversation we have with that unconscious decision is important too – we can resist, modify, or overthrow the dictates of our unconscious minds – and that’s where I part company with Amy Cuddy. I think it’s important to maintain that conscious conversation with our feelings, and learn to become intentional about them rather than just always reacting to our old patterns and responses.
But there’s no question that deliberately adopting a posture interrupts the unconscious-mind-body-conscious-mind progression and can therefore modify it. The process is not complete unless we also work with our conscious minds on our unconscious patterns, phobias, and fears. But it’s a start, and it’s worth doing in the long-term work to become intentional communicators.
This is an interesting read, and I have to ask about the stat experts referenced in Paragraph No. 3 who question the hot hand. Who are these stat experts that would take such a position?
In a game of chance, hotness might indeed be random and only perceived; but in a game of skill, please. Ask any Golden State Warrior fan if there is such thing as a hot hand. Hotness is the wonderful byproduct that exceptionally skilled performers find when they are able to achieve peak performance, and it is as relevant to public speakers as it is to athletes.
Game of chance or game of skill? That is a critical distinction in this discussion.
Rick! Read ’em and weep: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot-hand_fallacy and, from a professor of mathematics: http://regressing.deadspin.com/the-myth-of-the-myth-of-the-hot-hand-1588112937
No weaping here — just profound disagreement. I would start by taking issue with the assertion that confidence from having performed well does not contribute to future good performance. I disagree with that basic premise, but beyond that, we have to look at what created the good performance in the first place; often, it is not random. It is often a person’s ability to put him or herself into an ideal performance state that produces the good performance and increases the likelihood of future performance.
This is why athletic and physical performance is such a wonderful artform, precisely because it cannot be measured statistically. And it bears repeating: I have believed this my entire sports-playing life; I am even more convinced of it after watching the last two seasons of Steph Curry and the Golden State Warriors.
Thanks for your comment, Rick. It sounds like we’re talking past each other, or you misunderstood the point of the link, which was merely to say that the “hot hand” myth doesn’t stand up statistically. That doesn’t mean that people don’t believe it — clearly they do. As to “confidence from having performed well does not contribute to future good performance,” I have never said that and never would say that. To the contrary. And similarly “we have to look at what created the good performance in the first place; often, it is not random.” Of course! Who would say that it is random? The mathematical analysis of basketball shooting streaks is a different kettle of fish.
Brilliant as usual Nick! You are such an inspiration.
Thanks, Halina!