Somatotype and constitutional psychology explained

Somatotype is a theory proposed in the 1940s by the American psychologist William Herbert Sheldon to categorize the human physique according to the relative contribution of three fundamental elements which he termed somatotypes, classified by him as ectomorphic, mesomorphic, and endomorphic. He created these terms borrowing from the three germ layers of embryonic development: The endoderm (which develops into the digestive tract), the mesoderm (which becomes muscle, heart, and blood vessels) and the ectoderm (which forms the skin and nervous system).[1] Later variations of these categories, developed by his original research assistant Barbara Heath, and later by Lindsay Carter and Rob Rempel, are used by academics today.

Constitutional psychology is a theory developed by Sheldon in the 1940s, which attempted to associate his somatotype classifications with human temperament types.[2] [3] The foundation of these ideas originated with Francis Galton and eugenics.[4] Sheldon and Earnest Hooton were seen as leaders of a school of thought, popular in anthropology at the time, which held that the size and shape of a person's body indicated intelligence, moral worth and future achievement.[4]

In his 1954 book, Atlas of Men, Sheldon categorized all possible body types according to a scale ranging from 1 to 7 for each of the three somatotypes, where the pure endomorph is 7–1–1, the pure mesomorph 1–7–1 and the pure ectomorph scores 1–1–7.[5] [6] [7] From type number, an individual's mental characteristics could supposedly be predicted.[6] In a late version of a pseudoscientific thread within criminology in which criminality is claimed to be an innate characteristic that can be recognized through particular physiognomic markers (as in Cesare Lombroso's theory of phrenology), Sheldon contended that criminals tended to be 'mesomorphic'.[8] The system of somatotyping is still in use in the field of physical education.[9]

The three types

Sheldon's "somatotypes" and their associated physical and psychological traits were characterized as follows:[10] [7] [11]

scope=col width=10%Somatotypescope=col width=45%Physical traitsscope=col width=45%Psychological traitsNotes
Ectomorphiccharacterized as skinny, weak, and usually tall with low testosterone levelsdescribed as intelligent, gentle and calm, but self-conscious, introverted and anxious.
Mesomorphiccharacterized as naturally hard and strong, with even weight distribution, muscular, thick-skinned, and as having good posture with narrow waistdescribed as competitive, extroverted, and tough.
characterized as fat, usually short, and having difficulty losing weightdescribed as outgoing, friendly, happy and laid-back, but also lazy and selfish

Stereotyping

There may be some evidence that different physiques carry cultural stereotypes, as some cultures are more prone to certain physiques. According to one study endomorphs are likely to be perceived as slow, sloppy, and lazy. Mesomorphs, in contrast, are typically stereotyped as popular and hardworking, whereas ectomorphs are often viewed as intelligent yet fearful.[12]

Heath–Carter formula

Sheldon's physical taxonomy is still in use, particularly the Heath–Carter variant of the methodology.[13] This formulaic approach utilises an individual's weight (kg), height (cm), upper arm circumference (cm), maximal calf circumference (cm), femur breadth (cm), humerus breadth (cm), triceps skinfold (mm), subscapular skinfold (mm), supraspinal skinfold (mm), and medial calf skinfold (mm), and remains popular in anthropomorphic research, according to Rempel: "with modifications by Parnell in the late 1950s, and by Heath and Carter in the mid 1960s somatotype has continued to be the best single qualifier of total body shape".[14]

This variant utilizes the following series of equations to assess a subject's traits against each of the three somatotypes, each assessed on a seven-point scale, with 0 indicating no correlation and 7 indicating a very strong correlation:

Endomorphy=-0.7182+0.145x-0.00068x2+0.0000014x3

where:

x=(tricepskinfold[mm]+subscapularskinfold[mm]+supraspinalskinfold[mm])*(

170.18
height[cm]

)

\begin{align}Mesomorphy&=(0.858*humerusbreadth[cm])\\ &+(0.601*femurbreadth[cm])\\ &+(0.188*upperarmgirth[cm])\\ &+(0.161*maxcalfgirth[cm])\\ &-(0.131*height[cm])\\ &+4.5 \end{align}

PI=height[cm]
(mass[kg])1/3

PI>40.74

,

Ectomorphy=(0.732*PI)-28.58

39.65<PI<40.74

,

Ectomorphy=(0.463*PI)-17.615

PI<39.65

,

Ectomorphy=0.5

This numerical approach has gone on to be incorporated in the current sports science and physical education curriculums of numerous institutions, ranging from the UK's secondary level GCSE curriculums (14- to 16-year-olds), the Indian UPSC Civil Service exams, to MSc programs worldwide, and has been utilized in numerous academic papers, including:

Criticism

"The Varieties of Human Physique" by Sheldon et al (1940) classified body types into three categories using data processes that would not be accepted by researchers today.[29] Sheldon's ideas that body type was an indicator of temperament, moral character or potential – while popular in an atmosphere accepting of the theories of eugenics – were later disputed.[4] [30]

A key criticism of Sheldon's constitutional theory is that it was not a theory at all but a general assumption of continuity between structure and behavior and a set of descriptive concepts to measure physique and behavior in a scaled manner.[10] His use of thousands of photographs of naked Ivy League undergraduates, obtained without explicit consent from a pre-existing program evaluating student posture, has been strongly criticized.[4]

While popular in the 1950s,[31] Sheldon's claims have since been dismissed as "quackery".[10] [2] [32] [33] [34] Barbara Honeyman Heath, who was Sheldon's main assistant in compiling Atlas of Men, accused him of falsifying the data he used in writing the book.[4]

See also

Sources

Further reading

External links

Notes and References

  1. Book: Hollin, Clive R. . 2012 . Psychology and Crime: An introduction to criminological psychology . Routledge . 978-0415497039. 59.
  2. Rafter . N. . Somatotyping, antimodernism, and the production of criminological knowledge . . 45 . 4 . 2008 . 805–33 . 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2007.00092.x.
  3. Book: The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology . Constitutional Theory . 2009 . Penguin Books . 9780141030241 . Credo Reference.
  4. Vertinsky . P. . 2007 . Canadian Bulletin of Medical History . 24 . 2 . 291–316 . Physique as destiny: William H. Sheldon, Barbara Honeyman Heath, and the struggle for hegemony in the science of somatotyping . 18447308 . 10.3138/cbmh.24.2.291 . free .
  5. Mull . Amanda . 2018-11-06 . Americans can't escape long-disproven body stereotypes . . en-US . 2018-12-31.
  6. Book: Sheldon, W.H. . William Herbert Sheldon . 1954 . Atlas of Men: A guide for somatotyping the adult male at all ages . New York . Harper.
  7. Book: Kamlesh, M.L. . 2011 . Psychology in the Physical Education and Sport . https://books.google.com/books?id=up-Bc_E_w9UC&pg=PT508 . Pinnacle Technology . 9781618202482 . Ch. 15: Personality and sport § Sheldon's constitutional typology .
  8. Book: di Cristina . Bruce . Gottschalk . Martin . Mayzer . Roni . Bruce Arrigo . Heather Bersot . 2014 . The Routledge Handbook of International Crime and Justice Studies . Routledge . 978-1-136-86850-4 . 13–15 . Four currents of criminological thought . https://books.google.com/books?id=8WptAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA15.
  9. Kathirgamam . Vijayakumar . Ambike . Mandar . Bokan . Raju . Bharambe . Vaishaly . Prasad . Arun . 2020-04-15 . Analyzing the effects of exercise prescribed based on health-related fitness assessment among different somatotypes . Journal of Health Sciences . en . 10 . 1 . 83–89 . 10.17532/jhsci.2020.876 . 218816659 . 1986-8049. free .
  10. Book: Roeckelein, Jon E. . 1998 . Sheldon's type theory . Dictionary of Theories, Laws, and Concepts in Psychology . 427–428 . . 9780313304606 . https://books.google.com/books?id=6mu3DLkyGfUC&pg=PA427.
  11. Timmermans . Floyd . Jansen . Britt . Mokken . Sterre . Heer . Merel . Veen . Kevin . Bouman . Mark-Bram . Mullender . Margriet . Grift . Tim . 2021-02-17 . The ideal location of the male nipple-areolar complex: A pinpointing algorithm . International Journal of Transgender Health . 22 . 4 . 403–411 . 10.1080/26895269.2021.1884926 . 37818394 . 233928744. free . 10561627 . 1765/135046 . free .
  12. Ryckman . R.M. . Robbins . M.A. . Kaczor . L.M. . Gold . J.A. . 1989 . Male and female raters' stereotyping of male and female physiques . . 15 . 2 . 244–251 . 10.1177/0146167289152011 . 145753602.
  13. Book: Anthropometrica: A Textbook of Body Measurement for Sports and Health Courses. Kevin . Norton. Tim . Olds. Australian Sports Commission; UNSW Press. 1996. 978-0868402239.
  14. Book: Rempel, R. A Modified Somatotype Assessment Methodology. 1994. Simon Fraser University. 978-0-612-06785-1.
  15. Olympic Lightweight and Open Rowers possess distinctive physical and proportionality characteristics for selecting elite athletes. Kerr . D. Ross . WD. Norton . K. Hume . P. Kagawa. Masaharu. 2007. . 25. 1 . 43–53 . 10.1080/02640410600812179. 17127580 . 19851908 .
  16. Anthropometric characteristics, body composition and somatotype of elite junior tennis players. Sánchez-Muñoz . C. Sanz . D. Mikel Zabala . M. Br J Sports Med. November 2007. 41. 11. 793–799. 10.1136/bjsm.2007.037119. 2465306 . 17957016.
  17. Somatotype Variables Related to Muscle Torque and Power in Judoists. Lewandowska . J. Buśko . K. Pastuszak . A. Boguszewska . K . Journal of Human Kinetics . 30. 2011. 2011 . 21–28. 10.2478/v10078-011-0069-y. 3588646 . 23487284.
  18. Anthropometric characteristics and body composition of Greek elite women volleyball players. Papadopoulou . S. Kinanthropometry VII. 7. Pochefstroom University for CHE. H. . de Ridder . T. . Olds. 93–110 . January 2003.
  19. Somatotype of Top-Level Serbian Rhythmic Gymnasts . Purenović-Ivanović . T . Popović . R. Journal of Human Kinetics. 40. 1. 181–187. 1899-7562. 10.2478/hukin-2014-0020. April 2014. 4096098 . 25031686.
  20. Height, weight, somatotype and body composition in elite Spanish gymnasts from childhood to adulthood. Alfredo . Irurtia Amigó. Apunts Med Esport. 2009. 61. 18–28.
  21. Anthropometric, morphological and somatotype characteristics of athletes of the Brazilian Men's volleyball team: an 11-year descriptive study. Petroski . 2013. Brazilian Journal of Kineanthropometry & Human Performance. 15. 2. 184.
  22. Comparison of body composition and somatotype of trained female triathletes. Christopher N.. Leake. Carter . JE . 1991. Journal of Sports Sciences. 9. 2. 125–135. 10.1080/02640419108729874. 1895351.
  23. Study on the adult physique with the Heath-Carter anthropometric somatotype in the Han of Xi'an, China. LT . Yang. 2015. 25940679. 10.1007/s12565-015-0283-0. 91. 2 . Anat Sci Int. 180–7. 29933361 .
  24. Somatotype characteristics of female patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. AG . Baltadjiev. 2013. 23905489. 55. 1 . Folia Med (Plovdiv). 64–9. 10.2478/folmed-2013-0007. 45784636 .
  25. Somatotype characteristics of male patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. AG. Baltadjiev. 2012. 23101284. 54. 2. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 40–5. 10.2478/v10153-011-0087-5. 3618307.
  26. Somatotype analysis of elite Taekwondo athletes compared to non-athletes for sports health sciences . Noh . etal . Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences . 2013 . 5 . 4 . 189–196 . 10.1007/s13530-013-0178-1. 2013TxEHS...5..189N . 16963270 .
  27. Somatotype: a more sophisticated approach to body image work with eating disorder sufferers. Stewarta . etal . Advances in Eating Disorders: Theory, Research and Practice . 2 . 2 . 2014 . 10.1080/21662630.2013.874665 . 125–135. 145547027 .
  28. The Relationship between Posture and Somatotype and Certain Biomechanical Parameters of Iran Women's National Dragon Boat Team . Pourbehzadi . etal . . 2012 . 3 . 7 . 3657–3662.
  29. The BMI as a somatotypic measure of physique:A rejoinder to Jeremy E.C. Genovese. 10.1016/j.soscij.2009.04.006. The Social Science Journal. 2009 . Maddan . Sean . Walker . Jeffery T. . Miller . J. Mitchell . 46 . 2 . 394–401 . 144994945 .
  30. Book: Vertinsky . 2007 . Body type . Reynolds . Cecil R. . Fletcher-Janzen . Elaine . Encyclopedia of Special Education: A reference for the education of children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities and other exceptional individuals . 3rd . Hoboken, N.J. . Wiley . 9780471678021 . http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/wileyse/body_type/0 . . 2014-11-20 . registration.
  31. News: Ron . Rosenbaum . 15 January 1995 . The great ivy league nude posture photo scandal . . 2 December 2011.
  32. Book: Zentner . Marcel . Shiner . Rebecca L. . 2012 . Handbook of Tempermaent . . 9781462506514 . 6 . Google Books.
  33. Book: Ryckman, Richard M. . 2007 . Theories of Personality . 9th . . 260–261 . 9780495099086 . Google Books.
  34. News: Nude photos are sealed at Smithsonian . 21 January 1995 . . 1 December 2011.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Somatotype and constitutional psychology".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.