Recent televised discussions about whether it is okay for candidates to stand on boxes behind the podiums during presidential debates, or not acceptable for them to do so, has made top-of-mind research on the importance of having the heads of everyone participating in a conversation at approximately the same height above the ground. By the way, debaters have been standing on risers (the technical name for a box that someone is standing on) for a very long time, and there are behind the scenes images from past presidential candidate debates to confirm that.
Research indicates that how we think about others is directly related to whether we’re physically looking up at them when we are talking to them, whether we’re literally looking down on them, or if we’re looking them square in the eye.
The studies that have been conducted indicate, basically, that if we look down on someone physically, we attribute more childish attributes to them while people we look up to have more adult associations. People being looked down on seem younger and less powerful and/or experienced, while the reverse is true for people being looked up at, who seem more powerful and experienced. People who are looked up to are more respected than those looked down on, and we are more apt to take the advice of those we’re looking up at, for example, which has implications for the outcomes of group discussions, for example.
We have more positive opinions of people whose body posture (seated, standing, etc.) matches ours and that can lead to impressions of trustworthiness, for instance. Also, we generally find people more trustworthy when both our sets of eyes are at the same level than we do when our eyes are at different levels.
All this means that although using bleacher type seats in a collaboration zone is a good way to save space, those bleachers don’t create ideal conditions for a discussion if it’s likely that people in a conversation will find themselves standing or sitting on different steps as they speak. Similarly, there should be enough seats of a particular type – standing stools, for example – so that everyone at a meeting can use them; there should only be one seat height in any area where people are likely to converse. Pairing a usual height conference table and chairs in the center of a space with taller, perching type options along a wall can have undesired consequences.
Something else to keep in mind: just looking up or down influences whether we think more concretely or abstractly. Looking up encourages abstract thinking, while when we’re looking down we think more concretely – which may explain the flow of meetings you’ve had with a leader on a stage.
Of course, not all of our heads are the same size nor are our bodies and necks the same length, so even if all seats are at the same height above the ground, all heads will not be precisely the same number of inches above the floor, and that’s fine. It seems that slight variations will not produce dramatic effects. Keeping relative head heights in mind, however, while developing any sort of place where people will collaborate “on an even playing field” seems like a good idea.
Sally Augustin, PhD, is the editor of Research Design Connections (www.researchdesignconnections.com). Research Design Connections reports on research conducted by social and physical scientists that designers can apply in practice. Insights derived from recent studies are integrated with classic, still relevant findings in concise, powerful articles. Topics covered range from the cognitive, emotional, and physiological implications of sensory and other physical experiences to the alignment of culture, personality, and design, among others. Information, in everyday language, is shared in a monthly subscription newsletter, an archive of thousands of published articles, and a free daily blog. Readers learn about the latest research findings immediately, before they’re available elsewhere. Sally, who is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association, is also the author of Place Advantage: Applied Psychology for Interior Architecture (Wiley, 2009) and, with Cindy Coleman, The Designer’s Guide to Doing Research: Applying Knowledge to Inform Design (Wiley, 2012). She is a principal at Design With Science (www.designwithscience.com) and can be reached at sallyaugustin@designwithscience.com.