For decades, the dominant scientific narrative portrayed early human hunter-gatherer societies as relatively egalitarian entities, devoid of pronounced hierarchies or structured leadership. This conception held that significant social inequalities were a relatively late development coinciding with the advent of agriculture and the rise of more complex civilizations. Recent groundbreaking research, however, is challenging this long-established view, revealing that nuanced forms of social inequality, particularly in the domain of influence and prestige, may have been intrinsic to human groups far deeper into our evolutionary history than previously thought.
Arizona State University has spearheaded this new inquiry with an interdisciplinary approach encompassing archaeology, ethnography, and experimental psychology. The emerging evidence points toward the existence of prestige-based hierarchies operating within early human societies. Unlike dominance hierarchies rooted in aggression or physical power, prestige hierarchies hinge on the perceived knowledge, skills, and successes of individuals, which confer upon them social influence and leadership roles voluntarily accorded by their peers rather than imposed by force.
Thomas Morgan, an evolutionary anthropologist affiliated with ASU’s Institute of Human Origins, elucidates this paradigm shift clearly. He highlights that human survival hinges critically on culture, cooperation, and the transmission of knowledge rather than individual brute force. In such a context, individuals exhibiting exceptional competencies or charisma naturally acquire social capital, effectively turning specialized skills into tokens of status within the group. This “talent marketplace,” as Morgan describes it, fosters an environment where influence is earned through recognized contributions rather than mere dominance.
The fundamental distinction between prestige and dominance hierarchies becomes particularly salient when one examines animal societies, especially non-human primates. Dominance hierarchies among primates typically involve direct competition for resources, characterized by aggression and physical confrontations, whereas human prestige hierarchies evolve through voluntary deference based on respect and perceived merit. This dynamic underscores how human social organization transformed as individuals began competing not only within groups but between competing human collectives, amplifying the need for effective and respected leadership.
Particularly noteworthy is the social psychological process underpinning these prestige hierarchies: individuals do not independently calibrate whom to follow but instead monitor the social cues from others, leading to a cascading effect in influence. As Morgan elaborates, the collective nature of human problem-solving creates a feedback loop where observing who receives deference fosters conformity in following the same leaders, generating a snowball effect that concentrates influence in the hands of a few. This process is not random but emerges systematically from group dynamics and cognitive biases shaped over millennia.
Robin Watson, a visiting researcher at ASU and lecturer at the University of Lincoln, further clarifies the adaptive function of this snowballing prestige mechanism. While consolidating influence in a small subset of individuals may appear as a form of inequality, it carries significant evolutionary advantages by simplifying decision-making and preferentially amplifying trusted, knowledgeable sources of information. Within social ecosystems, relying on prestige heuristics expedites learning and coordination, thus enhancing group survival odds.
To rigorously test these theoretical models, ASU researchers collaborated with UK-based scientists to deploy an innovative combination of computational simulations, controlled laboratory experiments, and evolutionary modeling. They engaged approximately 800 participants divided into small groups in a perceptual judgment task involving the identification of the most frequent color in arrays of dots. Following initial individual guesses, participants were asked to select whose answers to copy based on visible metrics of prior accuracy and social copying frequency.
The experimental outcomes illuminated profound insights into human social learning biases. Participants exhibited an evident double-edged preference: while they favored individuals with high accuracy, they were equally, if not more, drawn to those who had already amassed wide social copying—a measure of popularity or perceived prestige. This dual heuristic catalyzed rapid centralization of influence, with just one or two individuals in many groups emerging as dominant decision influencers within minutes. The resulting inequality closely mirrors real-world patterns of influence and wealth distribution observed in modern societal structures.
From an evolutionary perspective, these findings reveal the deep-rooted psychological substrates fostering prestige-based social inequality. Human ancestral environments likely favored cognitive strategies that prioritized copying successful and widely respected role models, accelerating cumulative cultural knowledge transmission. However, the challenge of discerning competent from less competent leaders remains an enduring problem, subtly mediated by indirect social indicators, including the behaviors of other group members.
Simulation studies conducted by the team support this narrative by demonstrating that natural selection would favor psychological proclivities toward prestige-following over simpler dominance-based or random choice mechanisms. This evolutionary optimization enhances decision accuracy and group cohesion. Importantly, the tendency to adhere to prestige hierarchies transcends mere historical artifact, remaining a pervasive feature of contemporary human psychology, manifesting across societal domains such as politics, education, workplaces, and online social networks.
Recognizing the evolutionary origins and functioning of prestige psychology has profound implications for understanding modern social inequalities and leadership dynamics. It suggests that influence disparities are not solely products of cultural constructs or institutional designs but also reflect fundamental aspects of human cognition and sociality. This insight provides a nuanced framework for addressing social stratification, emphasizing the potential for prestige to be adaptive and beneficial—when allied with competence—rather than inherently detrimental.
Nonetheless, scholars caution against deterministic interpretations that view hierarchy as inevitable or inherently positive. The formation of inequalities in influence can yield both adaptive advantages and social disadvantages, depending on context, transparency, and the quality of leadership. The key challenge remains in fostering systems where prestige accrues to genuinely skillful and ethical individuals rather than being exploited through superficial popularity.
The implications of this research resonate far beyond anthropology, influencing fields as diverse as organizational behavior, political science, and cultural evolution. Efforts to design equitable leadership structures and effective decision-making frameworks can benefit from integrating these evolutionary insights, emphasizing the role of social learning biases and prestige cues. Furthermore, as digital social platforms magnify the effects of copying and popularity metrics, understanding the mechanics of prestige psychology grows equally vital to addressing phenomena such as misinformation spread and influencer culture.
This groundbreaking research, published in Nature Communications and led by Morgan, Watson, Hillary Lenfesty, and Charlotte Brand, marks a pivotal turning point in our comprehension of human social evolution. By unveiling the psychological underpinnings and evolutionary trajectories of prestige-based inequality, it fundamentally reframes how we understand leadership, social influence, and the deep-rooted origins of hierarchy in human societies.
Subject of Research: Evolutionary origins and psychological mechanisms of prestige-based social influence and inequality in human societies
Article Title: Human prestige psychology can promote adaptive inequality in social influence
News Publication Date: February 3, 2026
Web References:
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-68410-7
References:
Morgan, T., Watson, R., Lenfesty, H., Brand, C. (2026). Human prestige psychology can promote adaptive inequality in social influence. Nature Communications.
Keywords: Prestige psychology, social influence, evolutionary anthropology, human hierarchy, cultural evolution, leadership, social learning, inequality, evolutionary simulations, group dynamics, social cognition
