What a Nod Says

Do we "thin-slice" body language to quickly gauge someone's socioeconomic status? Some preliminary research indicates what many of us know as common TV tropes -- the eager young striver, the bored, contemptuous socialite -- bears itself out with body language during stranger interactions. Not only do those with lower SES show more engagement behavior and those with higher SES less in this study, third parties were more likely (than chance) to recognize and assign SES correctly after watching these interactions.

A lay media piece can be found at Muzi.com: Body Language Reveals Wealth

They found that students whose parents were from higher socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds engaged in more of what he called "impolite" behaviors, such as grooming, doodling and fidgeting. Lower SES students showed more "I'm interested" gestures, including laughter and raising of the eyebrows.

The full text of the original article is available at the journal Psychological Science, Jan 2009: Signs of Socioeconomic Status: A Thin-Slicing Approach

ABSTRACT—Socioeconomic status (SES) is a primary determinant of health vulnerabilities and social affiliations. To ascertain if SES is signaled in brief patterns of nonverbal behavior, we had participants of varying SES backgrounds engage in a brief interaction with a stranger. Videos of 60-s slices of these interactions were coded for nonverbal cues of disengagement and engagement, and estimates of participants' SES were provided by naive observers who viewed these videos. As predicted by analyses of resource dependence and power, upper-SES participants displayed more disengagement cues (e.g., doodling) and fewer engagement cues (e.g., head nods, laughs) than did lower-SES participants. Results were also consistent with the thin-slicing literature, in that observers' estimates of SES were reliable with each other and accurately predicted targets' family income, maternal education, and subjective SES. Finally, nonverbal displays of disengagement and engagement predicted observers' estimates of SES, which suggests that these cues are systematic signs of SES. These results have implications for understanding the effect of SES on social interactions and patterns of disengagement and engagement in other realms.

While it's worth noting that they couldn't mask from the researchers or the naive third parties other SES "tells" like accents, clothing, accessories, or word choice, the study is still intriguing. When you are people watching, look for non-mirrored nods and laughs, or doodles and self-grooming during conversation - do they tell you something about the status (socioeconomic or other) of the participants? When you meet with your supervisor, who nods more?