Considering themselves as ill-equipped to compete against taller males, ‘shorter men show greater behavioral flexibility in securing resources.’ Work harder, not taller, or something to that effect.

Participants of varying heights were led into cubicles and asked if they ever felt small, grading this on a 7-point scale (1 = never, 7 = often). They were given eight €1 coins and a set of instructions.

The participants could take as many coins as they wanted, leaving the rest for a second unknown party. The results of the coin game are displayed on a fun XY graph below.

Note that the smaller a participant felt, the more coins they kept for themselves. Researchers explain that self-reported height was not a predictor of coin allocation, but rather the feeling of being small.

Significantly, this ‘game’ (seems like a generous term…) was played blind. The participants did not know the height of the other person that would collect the remaining coins.

TL;DR version? The smaller a person feels, the more likely they are to keep assets for themselves.

A second study called ‘Dictator Game’ was conducted, this time incorporating a competitive element. Twenty-one pairs of men were recruited.

They were introduced to each other. Their heights were measured and read out loud in front of the pair. In other words, a real dictator-measuring contest. Then they were led into separate rooms.

Eighteen coins were placed on a table. Participants were instructed to take as many of the eighteen coins as they wanted, with the remainder being given to the other man.

They were told that they would leave the lab separately, never having to meet the competitor again. No consequences.

Results showed that shorter participants, regardless of their opponent’s height, kept more coins for themselves. Here’s another graph for your viewing pleasure.