This is the post-print version of the final paper published in Personality and Individual Differences. The published article is available from the link below. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. Copyright @ 2010 Elsevier B.V.In ancestral human environments, muscularity and height (in males) and physical attractiveness (in both sexes) would theoretically have correlated positively with one’s social status, and thus with one’s ability to benefit from social inequality. We therefore hypothesized that individuals who are more characterized by these traits would be less egalitarian (i.e., less likely to believe that resources should be distributed equally in social groups). We used a white-light 3D body scanner to extract anthropometric measurements from 118 participants, and our four egalitarianism measures included social dominance orientation and social value orientation. We found that as hypothesized, muscularity and waist–chest ratio in males, and self-perceived attractiveness in both sexes, tended to associate significantly in the predicted directions with the four egalitarianism measures; most of these correlations were of medium size. Neither height, nor two anthropometrically-assessed attractiveness measures (volume height index and waist–hip ratio), associated significantly with any egalitarianism measure in either sex. Egalitarianism has crucial social repercussions (e.g., taxes, welfare and civil rights), and results from the current study shed light on its origins
