If you see a man walking into a bar with a John Wayne-esque stride, you might think this guy is the kind of confident guy. Or maybe you're not that polite. Either way, I'm afraid you'll involuntarily conclude his character based on his gait.
Psychologists have been studying these hypotheses for the past 75 years. And, their findings show that most of us are indeed prone to very similar interpretations of their personalities based on how others walk. After seeing the guy who wants to be a cowboy walk into the bar, there's a good chance you and I will invariably think he's that kind of person.
But how accurate are these assumptions? What other types of personality traits can we discern from someone else's gait? Chillingly, perhaps the best person we asked for this question is a psychopath.
First, let's take a look at the study of gait and personality. One of the earliest studies in the field was published in 1935 by the German-born psychologist Werner Wolff.
Without their knowledge, he filmed five men and three women wearing overalls and jumpsuits (to avoid revealing other personality traits) participating in a ring-throwing mission.
A John Wayne-esque swinging gait that conjures up a particular personality
Wolff then showed the participants a clip of the video tape with their heads omitted to look back at and asked them to interpret each other's personalities based solely on their gait.
The study had some novel and interesting details — wolf had to use a ticking metronome, for example, to mask the sound emitted by the video reels. More importantly, Wolfe found that his subjects easily formed impressions of each other based on each other's gait, and their judgments often had a lot of consistency.
For example, let's take a closer look at some of the portrayals that participants made of "Subject 45":
"This man is hypocritical."
"This is a man who does whatever it takes to get attention."
"This man is deliberately showy, arrogant, and eager to be admired."
"This man is insecure in his heart, but he is trying to pretend to be very secure."
"This man is dull and dull, a little low, unreliable."
Miraculously, the participants had such similar impressions of the subject and other subjects. Admittedly, given the small size of the sample size of this early study, and the fact that participants may have noticed other cues other than gait at the time, the study was not perfect (in addition, participants knew each other, although they had difficulty discerning who was who from the videotape).
In the late 1990s, American psychologists discovered that there are roughly two gaits
Modern experiments are more sophisticated, and one of the most important reasons is that digital technology can transform a person's gait into a simple light point map under a black background, using small white dots to show the movements of each major joint of the subject.
In addition, all other suggestive information except for the participant's gait movement was also excluded.
In the late 1980s, American psychologists used this research method to find that people's gait is roughly divided into two types, which can be summarized as follows: one style of walking is younger and more youthful, and the other is more old-fashioned. The former has a more elastic pace, more sharp hip swings, greater swings, and more compact steps; the latter has a less agile gait, is relatively slow and procrastinating, and the body arches forward more vigorously.
Crucially, the gait of a walker and his actual age are not necessarily a one-to-one correspondence – young people may walk in an old age, and vice versa. In addition, bystanders take it for granted that people with a more youthful gait style are happier and more powerful. This was true even when the actual age of the participants became apparent by showing their faces and bodies.
This kind of research proves once again how easily and inextricably one can infer about others based on the gait of others they see in front of them. However, the study does not give an answer to the question of whether these inferences are accurate. To that end, we had to turn to a joint Uk-Swiss study, published a few years ago, which compared participants' assessments of their own personality with those inferred by others based on a gait light point chart.
Once again, their findings show that there are two main ways in which people walk, although the terminology used in the study is slightly different: the first is called a bold, open-minded, free and loose walk, which bystanders see as a sign of adventurous spirit, extroversion, honesty, and warmth; the other is slow and leisurely, which bystanders interpret as a sign of emotional stability.
Crucially, however, bystanders were wrong —in fact, the two different gait styles were not related to the personality traits described above, at least based on the personality assessments that the pacers had done for themselves.
All of these studies convey the message that a person's gait is to the onlooker as his looks, dress, and accent are to the onlookers—seen as a source of information that reveals the type of person's personality. The difference is simply that, while there is evidence that looking at the face for assessment is fairly reliable, extrapolating based on gait is often wrong.
Extrapolating from gait is often wrong
At the very least, most of the judgments we make fall into this situation. However, in a darker and more mysterious situation, we can indeed make more accurate judgments about each other based on our gait alone — and this judgment is directed at our vulnerability.
Some of the earliest findings suggest that men and women with narrower steps, smaller swing bands, and slower gaits tend to be more delicate (note that this is quite similar to the older gaits found in personality studies).
In addition, a hair-raising Japanese study published in 2006 asked male subjects how likely they were to pick up and inappropriately contact female students presented with light-spot images. Based on women's gait alone, male subjects often indicated that they would be more likely to venture into women with more fragile personalities, such as those who were more introverted and emotionally unstable.
More worryingly, studies have shown that among inmates who score higher psychopaths, just by watching a videotape of people walking down a corridor, they can detect with particular certainty which person has been attacked before. And it seems that some prisoners are very fully aware of their skills in this area: Prisoners with higher psychopathic scores make it clear that when they make judgments, they focus on people's gaits.
This coincides with the rumored evidence. For example, serial killer Ted Bundy allegedly said that "by looking at the way she walks down the street," he "knows if she's the target of his own actions."
This whole field of research raises the question: Can people change the impression they leave on others by adjusting their walking posture? Some studies have shown that for the gait that makes people feel that you are not annoying (a larger meteor, faster like lightning, and a more rapid and bold swing of the arm), you can learn it, and in a less secure environment, women will naturally pretend to be the basic appearance of this gait.
But psychologists who have studied personality traits associated with boldness and sluggishness and wandering have pointed out that there is no conclusive jury as to whether these particular gaits can be taught.
Therefore, your efforts to make a good impression on others are mostly undesirable and useless. Otherwise, it may simply be seen as a desperate attempt, like the bluff of "Subject 45" – or the cowboy man who swaggers.