The effect of arm crossing on persistence and performance

Two experiments investigated the hypothesis that arm crossing serves as a proprioceptive cue for perseverance within achievement settings. Experiment 1 found that inducing participants to cross their arms led to greater persistence on an unsolvable anagram. Experiment 2 revealed that arm crossing led to better performance on solvable anagrams, and that this effect was mediated by greater persistence. No differences in comfort, instruction adherence, or mood were observed between the arms crossed and control conditions, and participants appeared to be unaware of the effect of arm crossing on their behavior. Implications of the findings are discussed in terms of the interplay between proprioceptive cues and contextual meaning. Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. More often than not, Pat Riley, coach of the National Basketball Association’s Miami Heat, can be seen during a game pacing the sidelines wearing a highly distinctive pose. Arms crossed tightly around his chest, chin jutting outward and shoulders spread wide, the seven-time title holder’s nonverbal signal could not be clearer: ‘I am going to persevere.’ But is Pat Riley’s posture more than just an outward signal of perseverance? That is, does the position of one’s body also inform subjective experience, consequently influencing behavior? Nonverbal behaviors represent an important component of human communication. Facial expressions, hand gestures, and bodily postures have all been shown to play an integral role in the way that individuals convey their thoughts, feelings, and intentions to others (DePaulo & Friedman, 1998). In addition to serving an expressive function, body positions and movements also contain information regarding one’s own experiential state (Barsalou, Niedenthal, Barbey, & Ruppert, 2003; Cacioppo, Priester, & Bernston, 1993; Strack, Martin, & Strepper, 1988). That is, these proprioceptive cues act as embodied manifestations of an underlying subjective experience. Theories linking physical movement with subjective experience date back to Darwin (1872/1965), who argued that motor movements are a central component of attitude. Darwin also believed that an individual’s emotional expression affects his or her emotional state (see also James, 1890). Recent studies have confirmed the connection between body position and psychological states; self-produced bodily cues have been shown to elicit corresponding affects, attitudes, and evaluative judgments European Journal of Social Psychology Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 38, 449–461 (2008) Published online 25 May 2007 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.444 *Correspondence to: Ron Friedman, Department of Clinical & Social Sciences in Psychology, University of Rochester, RC Box 270266, Rochester, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Received 28 December 2006 Accepted 20 April 2007 (Cacioppo et al., 1993; Friedman & Förster, 2000; Laird, Wagener, Halal, & Szegda, 1982; Neumann& Strack, 2000). In the present research, we investigated an unexplored proprioceptive cue and its influence on behavior within achievement settings. Specifically, we hypothesized that the experience of arm crossing would serve to direct people’s behavior by activating associations related to perseverance. To elucidate the means by which body positions influence psychological processes, we begin by overviewing the existing literature on proprioceptive cues. Following this review, we turn to an examination of arm crossing as a proprioceptive cue, highlighting the importance of contextual meaning on subjective experience. We then report findings from two experiments that tested our hypothesis regarding the influence of arm crossing on achievement behavior. RESEARCH ON PROPRIOCEPTIVE CUES Over the past quarter century, the impact of body positions and movements on psychological functioning has garnered increasing scholarly attention. Building on research showing that facial expressions influence self-reported affect, Laird et al. (1982) demonstrated that emotion-relevant facial expressions also improved recall of hedonically consistent material. Strack et al. (1988) refined the procedure for inducing facial manipulations by providing participants with a cover story that prevented them from identifying the emotional relevance of their expressions. Their research showed that participants induced to simulate smiling (by holding a pen with their teeth) rated cartoons as funnier than did participants in two control conditions. Next, researchers turned to the question of whether bodily cues could also activate ‘nonemotional’ feelings, defined as experiences not characterized by positive or negative valence. Examples of ‘nonemotional feelings’ include the experience of effort and familiarity (Clore, 1992). To test this possibility, Stepper and Strack (1993) induced participants to either contract their corrugator muscle (i.e., furrow their brow) or their zygomaticus muscle (i.e., adopt a slight smile); furrowing the brow was presumed to be associated with the experience of expending effort. Findings revealed that self-reported effort was indeed influenced by the proprioceptive cue of contracting the corrugator muscle, such that those with furrowed brows reported having exerted effort to a greater extent. Nonfacial proprioceptive cues have also been found to impact psychological processing. Wells and Petty (1980), for example, showed that motor movements can affect attitudinal persuasion. Participants asked to move their head either horizontally or vertically, while listening to an editorial, differed in the degree to which they agreed with the message they heard. Nodding participants were more likely to endorse the content of the editorial, suggesting that the propriceptive cue of vertical head movement facilitated attitudinal agreement. Förster (2004) obtained a similar finding using a more subtle manipulation to induce participant head nodding and shaking. Participants were presented with various consumer products moving across a computer screen, either vertically or horizontally, and asked to evaluate each item. Positively valenced products were evaluated more positively when presented vertically, suggesting that induced head nodding led to greater liking for the product. To date, the proprioceptive cue that has attracted the most research attention is arm flexion and extension. Based on the theorizing of James (1884), Cacioppo et al. (1993) conducted a series of experiments showing that attitude formation is influenced by arm movement. By instructing participants to either press upward (arm flexion) or downward (arm extension) against a table, Cacioppo and colleagues succeeded in activating associations related to approach and avoidance motivation, respectively, consequently impacting judgments of neutral stimuli. According to Cacioppo et al. (1993), the influence of arm movement on cognitive functioning is grounded in learning theory. Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 38, 449–461 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/ejsp 450 Ron Friedman and Andrew J. Elliot