Somatotype and constitutional psychology

"Endomorph" redirects here. For the mathematical concept, seeEndomorphism."Mesomorph" redirects here. For the state of matter, seeMesophase.

Somatotypeis a theory proposed in the 1940s by the AmericanpsychologistWilliam Herbert Sheldonto categorize the human physique according to the relative contribution of three fundamental elements which he termedsomatotypes,classified by him asectomorphic,mesomorphic,andendomorphic.He created these terms borrowing from the threegerm layersofembryonic development:Theendoderm(which develops into thedigestive tract), themesoderm(which becomesmuscle,heart,andblood vessels) and theectoderm(which forms the skin andnervous system).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 psychologyis a theory developed by Sheldon in the 1940s, which attempted to associate his somatotype classifications with humantemperamenttypes.The foundation of these ideas originated withFrancis Galtonandeugenics.Sheldon andEarnest Hootonwere seen as leaders of aschool of thought,popular inanthropologyat the time, which held that the size and shape of a person's body indicatedintelligence,moral worth and future achievement.

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 threesomatotypes,where the pureendomorphis 7–1–1, the puremesomorph1–7–1 and the pureectomorphscores 1–1–7.From type number, an individual's mental characteristics could supposedly be predicted.In a late version of apseudoscientificthread withincriminologyin which criminality is claimed to be an innate characteristic that can be recognized through particularphysiognomicmarkers (as inCesare Lombroso's theory ofphrenology), Sheldon contended that criminals tended to be 'mesomorphic'.The system of somatotyping is still in use in the field ofphysical education.

The three types

Comparison of Sheldon's body types

Sheldon's "somatotypes" and their associated physical and psychological traits were characterized as follows:

Somatotype	Physical traits	Psychological traits	Notes
Ectomorphic	characterized as skinny, weak, and usually tall with low testosterone levels	described as intelligent, gentle and calm, but self-conscious, introverted and anxious.
Mesomorphic	characterized as naturally hard and strong, with even weight distribution, muscular, thick-skinned, and as having good posture with narrow waist	described as competitive, extroverted, and tough.
Endomorphic	characterized as fat, usually short, and having difficulty losing weight	described as outgoing, friendly, happy and laid-back, but also lazy and selfish

Stereotyping

There may be some evidence that different physiques carrycultural 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.

Heath–Carter formula

Sheldon's physical taxonomy is still in use, particularly the Heath–Carter variant of the methodology.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".

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:

${\text{Endomorphy}}=-0.7182+0.145x-0.00068x^{2}+0.0000014x^{3}$ where:$x=({\text{tricep skinfold}}[mm]+{\text{subscapular skinfold}}[mm]+{\text{supraspinal skinfold}}[mm])*({\frac {170.18}{{\text{height}}[cm]}})$

${\begin{aligned}{\text{Mesomorphy}}&=(0.858*{\text{humerus breadth}}[cm])\\&+(0.601*{\text{femur breadth}}[cm])\\&+(0.188*{\text{upper arm girth}}[cm])\\&+(0.161*{\text{max calf girth}}[cm])\\&-(0.131*{\text{height}}[cm])\\&+4.5\end{aligned}}$

• Ectomorphy:Calculate the subject'sPonderal Index:${\text{PI}}={\frac {{\text{height}}[cm]}{({\text{mass}}[kg])^{1/3}}}$
  • If$PI>40.74$,${\text{Ectomorphy}}=(0.732*PI)-28.58$
  • If$39.65<PI<40.74$,${\text{Ectomorphy}}=(0.463*PI)-17.615$
  • If$PI<39.65$,${\text{Ectomorphy}}=0.5$

This numerical approach has gone on to be incorporated in the currentsports scienceandphysical educationcurriculums 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:

• Rowing athletes
• Tennis athletes
• Judo athletes
• Volleyball athletes
• Gymnasts
• Soccer athletes
• Triathletes
• Han people
• Persons withdiabetes
• Taekwondoathletes
• Persons with eating disorders
• Dragon boatparticipants

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.Sheldon's ideas that body type was an indicator of temperament, moral character or potential – while popular in an atmosphere accepting of the theories ofeugenics– were later disputed.

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.His use of thousands ofphotographs of naked Ivy League undergraduates,obtained without explicit consent from a pre-existing program evaluating student posture, has been strongly criticized.

While popular in the 1950s,Sheldon's claims have since been dismissed as "quackery". Barbara Honeyman Heath, who was Sheldon's main assistant in compilingAtlas of Men,accused him of falsifying the data he used in writing the book.

See also

• Biological anthropology
• Biomechanics
• Body mass index
• Body shape
• Eugenics in the United States
• Female body shape
• Kinanthropometry
• Neurobiological effects of physical exercise
• Physiognomy
• Physiology
• Somatology

Sources

• Gerrig, Richard; Zimbardo, Phillip G. (2002).Psychology and Life(16th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.ISBN0-205-33511-X.
• Hartl, Emil M.; Monnelly, Edward P.; Elderkin, Roland D. (1982).Physique and Delinquent Behavior (A Thirty-year Follow-up of William H. Sheldon's Varieties of Delinquent Youth).New York: Academic Press.ISBN0-12-328480-5.

Further reading

• Sheldon, William H. (1942).The Varieties of Temperament.New York; London:Harper & Brothers.Archived fromthe originalon 2012-02-24 – viaUniversity of Delhi.
• Carter, J.E. Lindsay; Heath, Barbara Honeyman (1990).Somatotyping-development and Applications.Cambridge University Press.ISBN0521351170.
• Arraj, Tyra; Arraj, James (January 1988)."Ch. 4:William Sheldon's Body and Temperament Types".Tracking the Elusive Human.Vol. I. Midland, OR: Inner Growth.ISBN0914073168– via innerexplorations.
• Coughlan, Robert (June 25, 1951)."What manner of morph are you?".Life.Vol. 30, no. 26. pp. 65–79 – viaGoogle Books.

External links

• "Somatotype".Encyclopædia Britannica Online.