By Dr. Ken Broda Bahm:
If you would like more confidence, and if you’ve seen Amy Cuddy’s widely-viewed TED talk, then maybe you’ve tried the “power pose.” Legs apart, head straight and tall, hands on hips or arms raised above your head — it is a posture we often see people naturally adopt after winning a victory of some kind. If you take Cuddy’s advice on face value, then it isn’t just a natural reaction, it can be a strategy. According to a perspective called, “embodied cognition,” our mental states respond to our physical postures, and a power pose can cause chemical changes (increased testosterone and cortisol) as well as a temporary feeling of physical and psychological strength. This can in turn cause changes in behavior and risk-taking, as well as improved performance. That perspective, along with a study from a few years back (Carney, Cuddy, & Yap, 2010), led to the advice that we should be using the power pose as a kind of confidence hack before interviews or other challenging tasks. At the peak of this passion for the power pose, I could imagine attorneys trying a power pose in the elevator or a quiet hallway prior to openings, closings, or a tough examination.
But all of that excitement came prior to the realization that the social science it was all based on suffered from one little problem: It could not be replicated. Recent research adds to the weight of evidence against the idea. Researchers from the University of Pennsylvania (Smith and Apicella, 2016) tested the effects of power posing for winners and losers in a contest and found no main effects for testosterone, cortisol, feelings of power, risk-taking, or performance. There was some indication, even of a reduction in testosterone, in some who had power posed prior to losing their contest. As lead author Kristopher Smith said in a ScienceDaily release, “people might not be able to ‘fake it until they make it,’ and in fact it might be detrimental.” This study joins a number of other studies failing to reproduce the benefits of power posing (e.g., see Ranehill et al., 2015 and research discussed in a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, “When Big Ideas Go Bad”). For persuaders in the legal arena, the slumping of the power pose carries both real and metaphoric significance. Realistically, it means that power posing isn’t necessarily a reliable way to prop up the under-confident witness or attorney. But metaphorically, I think there are examples of other “power poses” out there: postures or stances that are meant to convey certainty and authority, but which have no real grounding and are more apparent than real. In this post, I’ll take a look at three such poses.
The Researcher’s Power Pose:
Broadly, I think you can see the initial treatment of the research, by Amy Cuddy and others, as a kind of power pose. The peer-reviewed studies seem more valid, more strong, and more real when it is amplified by non-peer reviewed work like the popular press and, yes, blogs as well. So if you see anyone taking a single research finding and turning it into rock-solid, sure-fire advice, be skeptical…even if it is me. Replication isn’t sexy, but it is the heart of how science moves forward, particularly social science. This advice to rely most on research that has stood the test of time bears not just on the techniques of effective communication and persuasion, but also on the research that expert witnesses are relying on. Next time you cross-examine an opposing expert, ask whether the testimony is based on research findings and, if so, on replicated findings.
The Witness’s Power Pose:
Whether the witness is there to share facts or opinions, confidence is important. But that confidence is best when it rests on the bedrock of a genuine comfort with the content of testimony as well as the hard work of learning to convey that testimony accurately and effectively. A false confidence — a projection of certainty that goes beyond what the facts or the preparation would support — can quickly turn into a liability under effective cross-examination. Research, for example, shows that certainty does not correlate nicely with accuracy in a witness context, and arrogance can be a thin veneer of protection for the witness who is genuinely uncomfortable with the situation or the testimony. For the other side’s witnesses, challenge that comfort with strategic cross, and for your own witnesses, make sure they aren’t just versed in the performance of confidence, but are instead as genuinely comfortable and confident as possible.
The Party’s Power Pose:
Since many cases now end up settling rather than being resolved through trials, the communications between the parties during litigation can end up being a battle of poses. Of course, a lot of that is rational, and it only makes sense to frame your case in the best possible terms in order to encourage a good mediation or settlement. At the same time, realistic case assessment requires that you keep an eye toward the realities underlying the spin. Ignoring true weaknesses, inventing or grossly exaggerating strengths, or playing chicken for its own sake, will not make your position credible to the other side. A healthy bit of spin is part of the advocate’s craft, but you need to recognize when you are on firm ground and when you aren’t. That is one of the reasons why a mock trial or focus group can be so effective: It can tell you when you’re being accurate and when you’re just striking a pose.
______
Other Posts on the Role of Perceptions in Litigation:
- Account for Selective Perception: 2012 Presidential Debate Series, Part Four
- When it Comes to Bad Defense Venues, Treat Perception as Reality
- Don’t Confuse Certainty with Accuracy when It Comes to Witness Testimony
______
Carney, D. R., Cuddy, A. J., & Yap, A. J. (2010). Power posing brief nonverbal displays affect neuroendocrine levels and risk tolerance. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1363-1368.
Ranehill, E., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., Leiberg, S., Sul, S., & Weber, R. A. (2015). Assessing the Robustness of Power Posing No Effect on Hormones and Risk Tolerance in a Large Sample of Men and Women. Psychological science, 0956797614553946.
Smith, K.M., Apicella, C. L. (2016). Winners, losers, and posers: The effect of power poses on testosterone and risk-taking following competition. Hormones and Behavior, 2016; DOI: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2016.11.003
Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license