Gossip: An Evolutionary Examination

This topic submitted by Sarah Hewitt and Catherine Johnson (likeelectric@hotmail.com) at 2:13 PM on 4/30/02. Additions were last made on Tuesday, April 30, 2002. Section: Myers.

Before we delve into the depths of gossip it is necessary to provide a few useful definitions. Gossip according to The American Heritage Dictionary is Òrumor or talk of a personal sensational, or intimate nature.Ó Though gossip may mean different things to different people Patricia Meyer Spacks explains that gossip always Òinvolves talk about one or more absent figures; always such talk occurs in a relatively small group.Ó (1985). One website on the topic of gossip succinctly explains three functions of gossip. The first is networking that allows the gossiper to Òachieve a higher position in the hierarchy
by "establishing" the status of surrounding people.Ó (http://www.2yaks.com/funpages2/funpage123.html) The second is influence wherein Òthe gossiper tries to advance a good opinion about him/herself to the group, often by engaging in "small talks" and mobilizing facial expression to convey interest and sympathetic sentiments.Ó (http://www.2yaks.com/funpages2/funpage123.html) And finally, the ability to form alliances: ÒThe gossipers supply information to whom they are attracted, and with whom they wish to align themselves.Ó (http://www.2yaks.com/funpages2/funpage123.html)
We chose to focus our attention towards gossip because we, admittedly gossip a great deal. We have worked together on several projects for Western classes and we often find ourselves straying from actual work in order to gossip, sometimes for hours at a time. Though we are not necessarily proud of our behavior, it seemed almost unavoidable in our social interactions with each other. When we began thinking of a topic for study within this course, gossip seemed to be the most logical site for research. We are quite familiar with the behavior and were curious to find any relation it might have to evolutionary psychology. We might even find ourselves justified in our behavior. If gossip is an instinctual behavior, driven by our desire to pass on our genes, we are simply acting as good ancestors. Right?

We hypothesize that gossip within our society is seen as socially acceptable when used as a method of social control but is viewed as unacceptable when exercised with self-serving goals. We further hypothesize that when gossip is discussed as an independent phenomena people will tend to disapprove unless it is place within a context. Further we hoped to draw a link in the final stages of our research about the links between gossip and human nature, natural selection and evolution.
Some questions we considered in beginning to research gossip and its social implications include how gossip can serve to bring people together and help them form a stronger bond. Some researchers liken gossip to the primate practice of grooming oneÕs loved ones. Because gossip, as well as grooming, often involves sharing something intimate it heightens a relationship to a new level that few other socially acceptable activities can do. Another question we considered is how and why gossip differs when it is used as social control rather than as a self-serving tool. It seems that people perceive social control gossip as a necessary practice in order to deter destructive behavior from society. However, self-serving gossip is perceived as serving no greater purpose. It is interesting to note as our study proceeds how people differentiate between the two aforementioned forms of gossip. Though gossip and its implications are difficult to pinpoint objectively it seems that almost everyone has an opinion surrounding the morality of instances of gossip in everyday life.

Wilson et al. (2000) conducted a study to understand common reactions to and perceptions of various forms of gossip. The study focused on gossip for social control versus self-serving gossip. The group presented their subjects with various scenarios revolving around different instances of gossip. Typically, the results revealed that it is more common to approve of gossip as a means of social control than self-serving gossip. We hoped to expand upon this study including, among other things, the relationship of these findings to human nature and evolution.

Gossip seems to be connected to human nature and natural selection because it allows society to keep watch over any members of the society who may be acting outside the social norms. Gossip also relates to natural selection because the main purpose of gossip are to improve the perceptions of others about ourselves and our kin and presenting our competitors in a negative light thus making our genes more appealing to the general population. ÒNot surprising, we are especially interested in gossiping about the activities of others that most effects our status and the status of those around us, such as relatives, close friends, and those in our immediate sphere of influence in the community, plus members of the community or society that are high ranking or have high social status.Ó (http://www.human-nature.com/articles/clinton.html) This allows us to maintain and encourage the social norms of those close to us thus encouraging them to act within the social norms and eventually making them more desirable to other members of society enabling them to pass on their genes (our genes) with ease.
In order to more concretely test these ideas we created a survey composed of questions replicating one of the experiments of Wilson et al. and several of our own design. With the completion of our research we hope to prove that gossip is more than Òessentially what it is now: a code word for sin, sex and slander, useless small talk or ÔcattyÕ backstabbing insultsÓ (1987). Though gossip is regarded as trivial, it may have a grander significance socially and evolutionary.
We made two different surveys, to present two scenarios written by Wilson et al., and these surveys may be seen as we presented them to our subjects below.

Please read the given scenario and then answer the questions following. Thank you.

Jane and Susan are waiting outside their biology class for the final grades to be posted. They have been best friends since high school. Both are hardworking students well liked, and trusted by their friends. They take their classes very seriously and each are working part time jobs to supplement their academic scholarships. The grade in this class is particularly important because the medical schools they have applied to have high standards. When the grades are posted they see that they have just missed the cut off for a grade the schools find acceptable.
Jane: This would be easier to take if I didnÕt know a group of students cheated.
Susan: Really? What do you mean??
Jane: They asked me if I wanted to join them. They stole a copy of the exam from the office the night before.

¬ How acceptable is JaneÕs behavior in this scenario?

1 2 3 4 5
completely unacceptable ---------------> totally acceptable

¬ Do you think Jane should have said this to Susan?
Yes No
¬ Do you think positively or negatively of people who gossip? (circle one)
¬ Write down 4 words you associate with gossip.

¬ Do you gossip? Yes No
Please read the given scenario and then answer the questions following. Thank you.

Jane and Susan are waiting outside their biology class for the final grades to be posted. They have been best friends since high school. Both are hardworking students well liked, and trusted by their friends. They take their classes very seriously and each are working part time jobs to supplement their academic scholarships. The grade in this class is particularly important because the medical schools they have applied to have high standards. When the grades are posted they see that they have just missed the cut off for a grade the schools find acceptable.
Jane: I bet the reason I got a bad grade is because I am obviously smarter than those suck-ups in the front row.
Susan: Really? What do you mean??
Jane: You know, how they pretend theyÕre so interested in what is going on in everything the professor says.
¬ How acceptable is JaneÕs behavior in this scenario?
1 2 3 4 5
completely unacceptable ---------------> totally acceptable
¬ Do you think Jane should have said this to Susan?
Yes No
¬ Do you think positively or negatively of people who gossip? (circle one)

¬ Write down 4 words you associate with gossip.

Do you gossip? Yes No
The questions from the Wilson study attempt to distinguish attitudes people have about the two different types of gossip discussed above: social control gossip and self-serving gossip. The scenario in the first survey (given to half of the subjects) is an example of self-serving gossip. Jane gossips to Susan about other students in their biology class in order to make herself appear smarter and more socially acceptable in her behavior in the class. We hoped that those filling out the survey would find this example of gossip less favorable.
The second survey (given to the other subjects) presents an example of social control gossip. In this case, Jane gossips with Susan, telling her that the other students in the class had been cheating. In this way, she is attempting to present this as an unacceptable behavior, thus keeping it in check. We hoped this example would be seen as more favorable.
On both surveys we asked general questions about impressions those surveyed hold about gossip and about their own gossiping practices. We hoped to use these answers to tie the Wilson results to the idea of evolutionary psychology.
Our results are displayed on the graphs below and analyzed in the following pages.

ÒThe precise sense of ÒgossipÓ to be analyzed is gossip as a form of inquiry used to elicit information or knowledge.Ó (Goodman 1994) We can use that knowledge in many ways but it is not always accepted with the same attitude. Gossip, although it has a vague and all encompassing (as well as ever changing) definition, is thought of in very different ways according to the intention of the gossiper.

As we stated earlier that our hypothesis is that gossip is more accepted when used as a method of social control rather than as a means of self-enhancement (referred to for the rest of the paper as self-serving gossip). Our survey proves this hypothesis to be true. According to the frequency distribution for rating chart, more people found self-serving gossip unacceptable as compared to social control gossip. We asked the participants of the survey to rate, on a scale of one to five (one being the least acceptable), the acceptability of the actions of the gossiper portrayed in the scenario they read earlier in the survey. Seventeen of the nineteen people surveyed on their reactions toward gossip as social control found it to be between neutral and completely acceptable (they assigned it ratings between three and five). Although only two participants surveyed about social control gossip found it to be unacceptable, the results were far more astounding when examining the results of the self-serving gossip scenario. All of those surveyed found the self-serving gossip scenario to be neutral to unacceptable (assigning ratings from one to three).
Although the sample sizes were smaller than we had hoped, the results still yielded statistically significant data. With a p-value of less than .0001 (as shown in the unpaired t-test for rating, grouping variable: not social or social chart) we know that we proved our hypothesis correct with the data we collected. According to Nicholas Emler, Òfar from being a trivial and superficial activity that appeals only to shallow and idle minds, gossip is intelligent action. It is a complex and sophisticated instrument of adaptation.Ó (Goodman 1994) This complexity can be found in the subtle alterations in a conversation making it either more or less acceptable. The mean acceptance of self-serving gossip is 2.125 according to the group info for rating chart. This number indicates low acceptance. People are not as accepting of self- serving gossip because they are often listening to people trying to boost their own reputation and this does nothing for the listener. There is no incentive for the listener to be accepting of this gossip. Social control gossip however, was rated as far more acceptable (with a mean rating of 3.632 according to the same chart) for a number of reasons. Social control gossip works to point out and put shame upon those members of society acting outside of the norms. Social control gossip can lead to a more controlled society with more people living within the accepted functions of society. When people employ social control gossip, they imply that both the speaker and the listener are well within those social limits that the subject of the gossip has gone beyond. When people are assured that they are accepted within society, they are far more willing to listen to ridicule of those who are not. According to Levin and Arluke (1987) we gossip to establish or maintain social cohesiveness within a group or to define ambiguous or anxiety-laden situations. Social control gossip propagates these functions whereas self-serving gossip only attempts to boot an individualÕs ÔrankingÕ in the social hierarchy thus making gossiping as a method of social control acceptable and self-serving gossip unacceptable.

Each subject, regardless of the scenario he or she was presented with was asked several general questions about gossip such as Òdo you think positively or negatively about gossip?Ó, Òdo you gossip?Ó, and finally each subject was asked to write down four words he or she associates with gossip. Though these questions are not directly related to the scenarios, we hoped to gain some knowledge about the subjectÕs attitudes concerning gossip in order to place out findings in perspective, and to see if these attitudes were in agreement with our assumptions about gossip and human nature.
For the first question, Òdo you think positively or negatively of people who gossip?Ó, the results concurred with our original hypothesis. Only six subjects report a positive attitude about gossipers, while 37 determined gossiping to be a negative behavior. As we originally believed, gossip is looked down upon as petty and tasteless. This seems to be a social value in our society: though gossip is a common activity in social interactions it is not an admirable behavior.

Perhaps these results may also be looked at from the perspective of evolutionary psychology. As the question is worded, it seems to imply that it refers to the behavior of others, rather than the subject. In this way, the question asks for an opinion about ÒothersÓ who gossip. In terms of human nature, we gossip to make others appear less desirable and ourselves more appealing. Therefore, it is only ÒnaturalÓ that the typical subject responds in this way because the gossip of others is perceived as harmful to the subject. In order to protect oneÕs reputation and thus oneÕs appeal as a potential mate, one must be cautious of gossip and therefore, gossip is seen as a negative behavior.
In contrast, the question Òdo you gossip?Ó, is clearly aimed at the subject participating in the survey. The results of this question were almost completely opposite those of the previous question. While 30 people admit that they engage in gossip, only 13 deny such behavior. This is ironic considering the general attitudes towards gossip. Logically, if the subject is opposed to the practice of gossip, he would either not gossip himself, or at least allege that he does not gossip in order to present a more consistent and appropriate self.
However, the inconsistencies make sense in terms of evolutionary psychology. Because this question is worded in such a way that it clearly refers to the behavior of the subject, the gossip of others is not a factor. Human nature would suggest that we gossip in order to improve our own image (as stated above), therefore my gossip is acceptable (even beneficial), but your gossip is a threat. In this way, the inconsistencies in attitude fit more easily into a pattern of logic and behavior.
The last of these questions asked the subject to write down four words he or she associates with gossip. Though these results could not be analyzed to the degree of the yes/no, positive/negative questions, we hoped to use these answers to find more specific consistencies among the attitudes about gossip. Though each subject came up with his or her own set of words, there are several themes expressed in practically every list. The first and most present is the theme of the dishonesty of gossip. The subjects generated words such as disloyal, manipulative, speculation, lies, propaganda, fallacies, bias, exaggeration, and fake. Because nearly every survey was returned with words such as these, it may be assumed that most people are aware that most gossip involves at least a slight manipulation of the truth either as a means to convey a certain image about the target of the gossip, or merely to increase the entertainment value of this common social practice. These words are also interesting when placed in context with the Òdo you gossip?Ó question discussed above. Though many of those we surveyed did admit to gossiping, they are also aware that it is an unreliable form of relaying information. This only lends itself to our assertion that gossip is an activity driven by human nature. That is, though we are aware of its shortcomings, we still engage in gossip perhaps because we hope it will improve our attractiveness as a mate.
Next, this question was also often answered with words implying the immoral nature of gossip. Common words included: harmful, hurtful, evil, bad, dirty, and nasty. This theme is interesting because it suggests that as a society we are conflicted about gossip. That is, our morals may be at odds with our instincts. Our morals are typically informed by our religions and our religions generally teach that we ought to be kind and considerate to our fellow man, rather that attempt to damage his reputation in order to improve our own. However, by nature, we know that a better reputation may mean a better chance for our genes to survive in the long run. In this way, we truly are faced with a difficult decision: do we follow our moral obligations or our evolutionary obligations?

Last, a less common theme was one of positivity surrounding the act of gossip. Perhaps a dozen of those surveyed provided words such as fun, entertaining, interesting, friends, and therapeutic. These words illustrate the opposite side of the conflict. While we may feel morally bound to be kind to others, we know that gossip may have positive outcomes and therefore we feel good participating in gossip. Further, we typically engage in gossip with people close to us. In this way, it may be an important bonding activity as suggested by these answers.

One problem we found in conducting this investigation was the discussion between those filling out the survey. They would say to one another Òoh, I donÕt think thatÕs a problemÓ and rationalize to one another before they discover that they have different surveys. Then they compared the two and chose their answers knowing what the other survey said. This was challenging for us because when they made that comparison we can assume they determined how acceptable their scenario was when they compared it to the other. It was challenging to persuade people to fill out the surveys. We did not have nearly as many results as we had hoped. Other that this we did not have any large problems while conducting our survey.
As we reflect on the data we collected and compare it to the research conducted by Wilson et al. we gossip is a far more complex subject that we had initially thought. The Wilson study surveyed the feelings of the subjects on their reactions to not only the gossiper but also the listener of the gossip as well as the person(s) being gossiped about. We were unable to do this because of the limited time we had to conduct our research.
There are factors at work in our survey and research in general that could have skewed our results. First, we conducted this survey in a university setting and distributed the survey to a primary sample population of subjects raging in age 18-22. Although we this was not the topic of our research, we assume that people at this age are more likely to gossip and think about gossip than those older and possibly younger. Also, now that we are finished with our research, we see more clearly that there are many other angles from which to observe gossip and basically any other social behavior. Though we may have come to the conclusion that gossip could be an instinctual behavior based on our desire to pass on our genes, we may have come to a different conclusion had we conducted the same questions for a course in sociology. Perhaps we would have found that gossip is not influenced by evolution but rather by social conditioning. Perhaps we gossip simply because everyone else does. In this way, it is clear that context is highly important in terms of studying social behavior.

Bibliography
Goodman, R., Ben-ZeÕev, A. (1994) Good Gossip. University Press of Kansas: Lawrence, Kansas.
Haviland, John Beard. (1977) Gossip, reputation, and knowledge in Zinacantan. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
Levin, J and Arluke, A. (1987) Gossip: the inside scoop. Plenum Press: New York.
Rosnow, Ralph L. (1976) Rumor and gossip: the social psychology of hearsay. New York: Elsevier.

Spacks, P. M. (1985) Gossip. Aflred A. Knopf: New York.

Wilson, D. S. et al. Gossip and other aspects of language as group level adaptations in Hayes and Huber. (2000) The Evolution of Cognition. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.

http://www.2yaks.com/funpages2/funpage123.html

http://www.human-nature.com/articles/clinton.html

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu