Master Thesis: Height and decision making: Do taller people make more self-assertive choices?

1. 2012
Height and Decision making
Do taller people make more self-assertive choices?
Jentl Wijnen
1

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The effects of height as well as choice behavior are searched thoroughly in existing literature.
However a combination of the domain of height and choice behavior remains unexplored.
Throughout history height has been universally prized and linked with ability. Animals already
used height as an index for power and strength. Height was found an indicator of power,
dominance and independence to others (Freedman, 1979). Height is associated with different
personality traits throughout history. In evolutionary terms taller men have better genetic
qualities and were more likely to have at least one biological child compared to shorter men
(Pawlowski, Dunbar and Lipowicz, 2000). It is found that feeling tall boosts self-esteem (Hall,
2006) and power (Judge and Cable, 2004). Being confident about ourselves and feeling powerful
is also visible in the product choices we make. When people have more self-esteem and feel
powerful they are more likely to act self-assertive. Self-assertive choice behavior is measured by
choosing extreme over compromise options, risk over safe options, non default over status quo
options and enriched over all-average options. Self-expressive options represent the
unconventional, non default options and are chosen by minority of consumers. A study about
perceived beauty showed that people who feel more beautiful are more likely to choose self-
assertive options, extreme options over compromise options, enriched options over all-average
options and non-default options over status quo options since beauty breeds self-esteem (Gorlin,
Jiang, Xu and Dhar, 2011).
This research paper is using perceived height where the paper of Gorlin, Jiang, Xu and Dhar is
using perceived beauty (2011). Furthermore, choosing risk over safe options is added as a
measurement of self-assertive choice behavior and power is added as a mediator together with
self-esteem compared to the paper of Gorlin et al. In this research it is tested if perception of
height is influencing consumer choice behavior. Perceived tallness is expected to lead to a
preference of extreme over compromise choices, risk over safe choices, non default over status
quo options and enriched over all-average options. It is further expected that this relation is
mediated by a level of self-esteem and power. Making consumers feel taller can provide them
with the power and confidence to resolve tradeoffs and make self-assertive choices.
Manipulation of height is done in a survey whereas the research of Gorlin et al. (2011) used an
experiment to boost perception of beauty. Furthermore this research is conducted in the
Netherlands and therefore mostly using Dutch respondents.
The sample consists of 236 respondents who successfully participated in the study. Respondents
ranged from 17 to 81. Demographics were equally divided to build op validity and reliability of
this research. In the first choice tasks choosing extreme over compromise options is measured
2

3. by three questions. Also choosing risk over safe options is measured by three questions in the
third choice task. In the third task choosing non default over status quo options is measured
with one question. Finally choosing enriched over all-average options is measured by one
question in the last task. Separate multiple regressions have been performed for the different
choice tasks. Respectively power and self-esteem were added to the model to test for possible
mediation in the relation between perceived height and making self-assertive choices.
It was expected that perceived tallness is increasing self-assertive behavior with respect to
different choice tasks. On the contrary is was expected that perceived shortness is decreasing
self-assertive behavior with respect to different choice tasks. Eventually, it turned out that with
respect to choice tasks of compromise versus extreme options, perceived shortness is
decreasing self-assertive behavior. Perceived shortness lowers self-esteem and power which
breeds the preference for compromise options. However no strong evidence was found that
perceived tallness increases power and self-esteem which is making people in particular more
likely to choose the extreme option, it is considered an important relation to bear in mind. It was
further found that perceived tallness is leading to more risk choices with respect to a safe versus
risky choices. Power and self-esteem were not supported as mediating variable in this relation.
Finally it was found that higher perception of height is leading to a higher feeling of power and
self-esteem which makes people choose non default options over the status quo options.
Furthermore it was found that males are in particular more likely to go for extreme options
whereas females are in particular more likely to pick enriched options. Also it was found that
females tend to perceive a higher amount of power and self-esteem compared to males,
controlled for actual height.
The aim of this research was to give a general indication on how perception of height behaves in
the choice domain. This research does involve some limitations which have to be taken into
account when reading the conclusions and future research should strive to examine different
choice tasks separately to give better insides. However it is believed that this paper can act as a
successful guidance for future research in which underlying constructs can be researched more
thoroughly, since it is revealed that perception of height is an predictor of different behaviors in
choice sets. Though the manipulation of height is not present during the whole survey it is
believed valid conclusions are drawn which are valuable for future research and actual
marketing practice. Marketers should take in account the effect of perception of height regarding
considerations sets that have compromise versus extreme choices, safe versus risk choices,
status quo versus non default choices and all-average versus enriched choices.
3