Social Status Schema:
Our Place in the
It is better to have a lion at the head of an army of sheep, than a sheep at the head of an army of lions.
Daniel DeFoe
OVER THE PAST decade, many psychotherapists have adopted the concepts and discoveries that have emerged from research on human attachment. The compatibility between psychotherapy and attachment theory lies in their shared appreciation of the importance of early intimate relationships on the development and functioning of our brains, minds, and subsequent relationships. The shaping of attachment schema and an appreciation of their connection with everything from physiological regulation, to resiliency, to abstract abilities have become woven into how therapists conceptualize and work with their clients. An understanding of the connections between early attachment and the shaping and impact of core shame has also demonstrated increasing clinical utility.
What is seldom directly addressed in psychotherapy (or in the research) is the significance of social status schema, or the role played by early experience in the shaping of how we behave in social groups. Like an attachment schema, a social status schema is a form of implicit memory that shapes how we relate to others and the roles we take on in groups. In addition, social status schema leverage the primitive neural circuitry of anxiety and fear to guide us into alpha and beta roles across situations.
Knowing Your Place and Doing Your Job
As mammals became more social, larger groups came to have a competitive advantage for land, food, and other resources. But if the benefits of size are to be realized, strategies for cooperation, organization, and leadership need to be established. Social behavior within primate groups is guided by neurochemicals, hormones, and natural instincts that seem to support group survival. Despite becoming civilized, the strategies of organization and social hierarchies that are seen in our primate relatives continue largely intact within us to this day. Many of the behaviors that have been observed in monkeys, apes, and chimpanzees are readily observable on the playground, at the office, at cocktail parties, and in social media.
Although hundreds of books on attachment crowd our shelves, few even mention issues of social status. This may be because therapists are, for the most part, outside of the social arena and are involved in a solitary career. It is even a bit confusing to know where therapists fit into the social hierarchy. Another reason may be that therapists see social status as a less important spinoff of attachment security, which does not appear to be the case.
Although I can only guess as to the reasons, the avoidance of an exploration of social status schema has left a large hole in an area of vital importance to our ability to love and work. How we deal with social status is of central concern in the development of self-esteem and self-identity. This chapter and the next are an attempt to address the existence of social status schema and how we might begin to think about addressing them in psychotherapy.
Why We Have Social Status Schema
The manager accepts the status quo; the leader challenges it.
Warren Bennis
If the group is to survive, each individual has to find a role and a place within the social hierarchy that contributes to group functioning. This is how groups become a viable source of survival and the arena in which our need to love and work is expressed. The need for alphas and betas arises in the process of establishing ways to coordinate individuals within a group. Once a hierarchy is set and individual roles are established, the group can turn its focus to the business of survival. Much like ants, for whom the clarity of the roles of the queen, soldiers, and workers determine the viability of the colony, humans have to find out where they fit in, if they should lead or follow, and what their job will be.
In attachment schema, fear and anxiety are utilized to keep parents and children close to one another for safety and survival. In social status schema, fear and anxiety are again leveraged to keep betas respectful and in line behind alphas. Alphas gravitate to front and center positions and contain qualities that are important to direct the group. By contrast, betas focus on the alphas, look to them for leadership and guidance, and try to stay in their good graces. Similar to those with insecure attachment schema, the anxiety that drives betas to pay attention to what the alpha is doing supports group coordination, cooperation, and leadership stability. Whenever social animals form new groups, be it in the wild, the schoolyard, or the workplace, they soon begin to test each other’s strength, intelligence, and resources to establish a leader.
Definition: Social Status Schema
These are constellations of biochemical interactions, instincts, and implicit memories that shape our behavior in groups. These schema determine whether we move to the front and become a leader or look to others to lead. They were organized through natural selection to enhance group coherence, coordination, and survival.
I observed a clear example of this when I witnessed a wolf’s encounter with a dog on a hot Arizona afternoon. A friend who owned a wolf and I pulled onto the campus of the University of Tucson to run an errand. When the wolf jumped from the cab, a dog of about the same size ran up to him, and they immediately began to sniff and wag. Within seconds they darted from the sidewalk into a large grassy area surrounded by hedges. They both took off at full speed, and when they got to the hedge, the dog crashed out of control into the bushes while the wolf gracefully sprang over them onto the far wall.
The dog, composing itself, shot once again across the courtyard with the wolf in pursuit. In no time, the wolf was on the dog’s tail. He tripped the dog by stepping on his back paw, and the dog went rolling in a cloud of dust. The dog jumped up, shook off the dust, and headed straight for us. The dog, arriving at the car behind the wolf, rolled on its back and bared its neck. In under a minute, we had witnessed a new pack establishing a dominance hierarchy. After that, they ran off to play together without any worry about who was the boss. For canines, whose social status is based on physical prowess and intelligence, the wolf had it all over the dog. Dogs have been shaped to survive by being good companions to humans, skills that hold no value in a wolf pack.
Because finding our place in the group is vital for our mutual survival, experiences of social successes and failures become imprinted in our minds, bodies, and spirits. We all seem to have a handful of victorious or humiliating memories that come to shape our self-image in groups. This imprinting shapes us into alphas or betas on our way to adulthood and maintains a powerful influence throughout life. Although they can be modified, the lingering influence of being socially shamed during childhood reflects how our brains and minds have evolved to maintain within-group social status.
Is being an alpha or a beta a matter of nature or nurture, genes, experience, personality, guts, or just a matter of circumstance? In the rest of the animal kingdom, alpha and beta parents tend to pass on their social status to their children through a combination of genes, biology, and behaviors. On the surface, humans are a bit more complex, judging each other on a wide array of attributes including size and strength, attractiveness, wealth, how we dress, and being cool. And unlike other animals, we spend our lives participating in a number of groups across which our status may vary. While social status cannot be reduced to simplistic distinctions between alphas and betas, the personalities and internal experiences of individuals that fit each category can be helpful in therapy.
Of Alphas and Betas
Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower.
Steve Jobs
Alphas are the hub of the social wheel, the ones that others look to in times of anxiety and uncertainty for protection and guidance. In a herd of elephants, the alpha is most likely to be the oldest female, the matriarch, who has the accumulated knowledge of the locations of water holes and the ins and outs of child rearing. In a troop of gorillas, the alpha is usually the largest male, the silverback. The silverback is best equipped to protect the troop from attack and more likely to father larger male children who will do the same. Thus, the alpha isn’t determined strictly by size, gender, or fighting power but by the value of that individual to the survival of the group in a particular environment.
One way to think of the alpha is as the brain of the group that organizes group behavior in a way to optimize group survival. The successful group is the one with the most effective leadership matched to the survival challenges, be it strength, cunning, or forethought. Predicting and adapting to the ever-emerging present is the prime directive of the human brain and the group. I emphasize the diversity of what it means to be an alpha because of our cultural bias to equate alpha status with a particular gender, body type, or set of behaviors. Social status is all about adaptation to particular ecosystems.
As I mentioned earlier, social schema, like attachment schema, are programmed at multiple levels, including the biochemistry and neuroanatomy of our brains. Even before birth, our mothers’ experiences, emotions, and states of mind begin influencing the production and availability of neurochemicals in our nervous system. At the same time, the neural networks that determine our dispositions and relationships begin to take shape. And while this shaping process continues throughout life, early experiences are usually the most influential.
Relationships with parents and siblings and early peer interactions appear to be of central importance. Most children start out seeing their parents as alphas—a view that establishes competition with parents as part of normal development. Simultaneously, children depend on their parents’ love and benevolence for survival. Emotionally mature parents see their children as separate people, encouraging their development and success by modulating their competitive urges in ways that allow their children to feel successful and to build confidence.
If parents didn’t receive the parenting and security they needed as children, their unresolved issues may become part of the childhood drama of the next generation. Emotionally immature parents may not be able to remember to be parents in situations of competition, giving their children repeated experiences of failure and shame. These parents will see their children as threats, and they will not be able to express encouragement or pride in their child’s accomplishments. Dominant, insecure parents may micromanage their children and undermine their children’s emerging confidence and skill development. Parents may also unconsciously pass the disappointment they felt from their parents onto their own children.
Sons of very successful fathers have a particular challenge: “How do I measure up?” Successful fathers are often far more appreciated at work than they are at home. Many fathers who are self-made and work hard to provide for their children come to resent their children for not sharing their initiative and work ethic. They often forget that their motivations were born of the same deprivation, fear, and struggle from which they have shielded their children. It is very easy to be successful and create children that you can’t relate to, which may be why so many of the men I’ve worked with feel that their fathers were disappointed in them.
Loss of a parent by death or abandonment generally leaves children in a compromised position. For some children, being abandoned is demoralizing, and it deprives them of a guide into adulthood. For others, the absent parent triggers a fighting spirit that inspires their power and success. I suspect that, regardless of the outcome, parental loss creates a deep sense of insecurity that is compensated for either by a drive to succeed or by a loss of motivation. Part of being an alpha or beta is modeling the social behaviors of your parents. The absence of the parent may, by definition, be a detriment to a child’s establishment of a place in the group.
The most obvious field of social dominance is physical and emotional aggression, what we call bullying. Children who are different in some way are more likely to be bullied; they are easily identifiable targets, often suffer from low self-esteem, have difficulty defending themselves, and are less likely to be defended by others. Being victimized by bullies can have serious emotional and behavioral consequences, especially if the abuse is severe and/or chronic. These painful experiences at vulnerable developmental stages can have lifelong effects. Never underestimate the impact of childhood bullying on the brains, minds, and hearts of your clients.
Most incidents of bullying are public displays, witnessed and remembered by others in the service of establishing or maintaining a social hierarchy. The public nature of being bullied enhances the amount of shame experienced by the victim, which increases the bully’s social status (at least in his own eyes). The feelings of shame associated with being publicly bullied reaffirm beta status both within victims and in the eyes of others.
Some individuals are able to translate experiences of being bullied into rage that they use to subsequently challenge and defeat the alpha. On the other hand, a large number of adults who experienced chronic bullying during childhood and adolescence continue to experience symptoms of their victimization in adulthood. Adult betas usually remember incidents of being bullied and hold onto it as evidence of their lower social status. Reports of depression, anxiety, blunted emotions, sleep disturbance, and symptoms of PTSD are common. What we label as psychiatric symptoms, when viewed through another lens, serve as lifelong mechanisms of social control.
The Four Schema
My attitude is never to be satisfied, never enough, never.
Duke Ellington
The group, like each individual brain, is an organ of adaptation in service of survival that depends on the complementarity of alphas and betas to support group survival. Groups usually contain a few alphas and many betas. As groups form, members jockey for position, display their abilities, and strive to develop alliances. On the surface, this behavior looks like it is driven by self-interest. Looking at it from a distance reveals that all the social climbing, challenges, rough-and-tumble play, and aggression also serve to provide the group with a pool of potential leaders. And while we generally associate alpha-beta conflict with males, it is equally important among females and occurs to different degrees across genders.
I have observed at least four social status groups in my personal and professional relationships. There are two groups of individuals who are well matched to their social status, whom I call natural alphas and natural betas. A third group consists of those who know they are betas, but aspire to become alphas (aspirational alphas), and a fourth group who think they are alphas, but are actually betas (pseudoalphas). Both aspirational alphas and pseudoalphas can be considered insecure because there is a conflict between their desired social status and the programming of their biochemistry, thought patterns, and behaviors.
A very small number of people are natural alphas—those who are good at and derive satisfaction from being leaders. While not deaf to the opinions of others, natural alphas pay less attention to group opinion, focusing on their instincts and inner vision to guide them. Natural alphas always have an eye on the future, and their dissatisfaction with the status quo is a secret source of pleasure. These qualities of the natural alpha provide the group with imagination, vision, and expanded adaptational capacities. Natural alphas don’t have to try to be alphas; their status comes from an inner sense of security, the anticipation and even expectation of success, and a goodness of fit with their natural wiring.
Another large group of people are natural betas and are well matched to this status. Natural betas are not haunted by fears of underachieving or keeping their light under a bushel. They enjoy their jobs and social relationships, and they are satisfied with what they have achieved. Natural betas are fine with external structure and generally feel most confident and happy when there are external rules and plans to follow. They tend to focus on the present situation and make the best of the resources at hand. It is easy to see how a large number of natural betas would be vital to a successful empire.
The Four Social Status Schema
Natural Alphas: Natural leaders who feel confident and free to have a voice in the group and lead when necessary. They are biologically programmed to be less anxious, more exploratory, and more resilient to physical and social stress.
Natural Betas: Natural followers who gain meaning and satisfaction in contributing to the group by fulfilling an established role. They are biologically programmed to be somewhat more anxious and more influenced by the opinions of others.
Aspirational Alphas: Biologically and psychologically programmed to be betas, these individuals have the desire and often the ability to take on an alpha role. Their desire to be seen and express themselves comes into conflict with their programming to be part of the group and follow the leader. These are the individuals who most often seek therapy and career coaching for assistance with personal growth.
Pseudoalphas: Individuals with the outward persona of an alpha but the internal conflicts of a beta. Pseudoalphas think of themselves as alphas and suppress their anxieties and insecurities through denial, bullying others, and bravado. Pseudoalphas are usually sent to therapy by others who find them difficult to live and work with or because of substance abuse or other self-damaging behaviors.
Neither natural alphas nor natural betas experience status conflict because their brains, minds, and relationships are aligned. If a natural beta is accused of having a fear of failure or a natural alpha is called a narcissist, it’s quickly shrugged off—nothing breeds confidence like knowing who you are and where you fit in your tribe. The optimum group might contain a natural alpha, many natural betas, and a few aspirational alphas to be ready when leadership roles become available.
Aspirational alphas feel like betas but suspect that they may have what it takes to be alphas and possess the drive to pursue leadership roles. While their minds tell them to be visible, take risks, and take charge, their brains are conditioned to follow the leader. Thus, aspirational alphas are in conflict—on the one hand champing at the bit to be seen, while on the other, ambivalent about making their ideas and intentions public. Aspirational alphas live in a dynamic tension between the drive to express themselves and their fear of visibility. This manifests as self-doubt (Am I smart and strong enough to make it?) and shame (Am I worthy of the love and admiration of others?).
Then, there are those who have attained the appearance of alpha status, yet are wired like betas. Although I’m not sure this group exists in other animals, it certainly does among humans. These individuals, whom I refer to as pseudoalphas, are often highly successful executives, doctors, attorneys, and politicians who function at a high level and have the respect and admiration of their group. Except for those few people who know them best, most see these people as natural alphas. However, pseudoalphas experience the greatest anxiety, insecurity, and conflict of all because they live in constant fear of being exposed. They are often ineffectual or toxic leaders whose narcissistic defenses and insecurities become group liabilities.
For natural alphas and betas, brains, minds, and relationships are aligned, which results in happiness, success, and minimal conflict. For aspirational and pseudoalphas, their brains, minds, and relationships are unaligned, which results in psychological and social conflict, creating a variety of behaviors that betray their inner struggles. Overall, these insecure betas are dissatisfied with their lives. They are frustrated and angry with others; they don’t perform up to their potential, and they usually feel disappointed in themselves. These are clients who come to therapy for help.
The Brains and Minds of Alphas and Betas
Mastering others is strength. Mastering yourself is true power.
Lao Tzu
The brains and minds of alphas are best characterized as being less fearful and anxious, more resilient to stress, and oriented toward exploration and creativity. On a biological level, human alphas are therefore less afraid to take risks or experience failure, and are more willing to try again after failure. Their memory circuitry is wired in a way that leads them to have positive expectations for the future and to anticipate positive outcomes. In other words, optimism is central to their experience.
Psychologically, alphas feel free to give voice to their opinion and are not preoccupied with how others perceive them. They feel comfortable being visible, and they don’t mind being the center of attention. Alphas also feel confident in plotting a course of action for themselves and others, and they are willing to accept the consequences of their decisions. All of these attributes would support successful group leadership in the vast majority of survival situations. Although many of these attributes parallel aspects of secure attachment, most securely attached individuals are not programmed to be alphas.
Alpha Wiring Shapes Us Into Leaders
| Bodily | A resting state that can respond to |
| Reactions | threat when it arises |
| Preparedness to act if necessary | |
| Emotions | Calm, curious, enthusiastic, optimistic |
| Thoughts | Expectations of positive outcomes |
| Minimal concern about potential failures | |
| Accurate assessment of external situations | |
| Accurate assessment of personal strengths, weaknesses, and abilities | |
| Behaviors | Exploratory, risk taking |
| Prepared to solve problems |
Betas experience their social and inner worlds quite differently. Betas are more anxious, concerned about how others view them, and fear failure. Being visible, singled out, and not deferring to others is experienced as a threat. Being seen at first triggers fear, and then a parasympathetic reaction resulting in retreat and deflation. Betas feel far more comfortable blending in with the group and following the leader. They may experience panic attacks when they do public speaking or gain social visibility. They experience relief when they don’t have to make decisions or are passed over when it’s time to make a toast.
The brains of betas are wired in ways that result in greater vigilance for environmental dangers, most notably, what they see in the eyes of others. Eyes have a direct line to the amygdala and signal other people’s opinion of who we are and what we are doing. Thus, the eyes of others signal betas about what to do and whether the alpha is pleased with them. In the absence of an alpha, betas have an inner set of eyes along with an inner voice that keeps them in line—what Freud called superego. Betas’ insecurity about their abilities and status amplifies the alpha’s power. Betas’ role in evolution was to be docile, agreeable, and controllable through intimidation, both by others and by the inner voices that keep them in line even when no one is watching.
Beta Wiring Shapes Us Into Followers
| Bodily Reactions | Hypervigilance for threat |
| Submission response | |
| Emotions | Anxiety, fear, sadness, depression, demoralization |
| Thoughts | Experience of danger, inferiority, anticipation of failure |
| Expectation of being shamed, feeling fraudulent | |
| Behaviors | Avoidance of situations associated with anxiety |
| Hiding, invisibility, social withdrawal, avoiding risks | |
| Underselling skills and abilities | |
| Avoiding situations where failure is possible |
The attributes of alphas and betas support group coherence and coordination through their complementarity: one group provides leaders, and the other provides good soldiers. The shaping of alphas and betas allows them to link together into a group mind that allows the group to function as a unit. Alphas seek solutions to problems while betas wait for the signal to act. The brains of alphas and betas have been shaped to link together in the service of the group. And while all of us experience our social status as an individual accomplishment or failure, the fact that we have a status and role surreptitiously serves the survival of the group.
A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.
Irina Dunn
On the surface, our culture tells us we are all capable of being alphas—anyone can become rich, become famous, or be president. Because it only happens for a relative few, the vast majority of us are at risk of feeling like failures. Given that most of us are wired to be betas, conflict between our programming often arises. The social mandate to be an alpha collides with our unconscious programming to get in line and not make trouble. But what if you have what it takes to be an alpha, but your brain and mind have beta programming that stems from core shame?
The goal of therapy, counseling, and coaching is to help those we work with to gain security by aligning their brains, minds, and relationships. Natural alphas and betas are not going to come for help about their social status schema. Rather, mostly aspirational alphas and an occasional pseudoalpha will find their way to us. The message to these folks is that if you have been programmed to be a beta, there are ways to learn how to be an alpha. This is accomplished by using our minds to develop strategies and learn new skills. It takes time, work, and the ability to face our fears. It also takes a guide, or a therapist, to help us along on our journey.
For many clients, moving from beta to alpha status is the central focus of psychotherapy. Many people that come to therapy are either aspirational alphas who want help achieving their dreams or pseudoalphas whose lives have been negatively impacted by the incongruity of their inner and outer worlds. One of the most common problems in our clients is that they have lived their entire lives evaluating themselves based on how others see them, and they have never learned to have their own feelings and perspectives. If this sounds like a form of brainwashing and social control, it is. Not by a cult leader, but by an evolutionary strategy shaped over millions of years.
Aspirational alphas will experience success that leads them to public speaking, which will trigger anxiety and even panic attacks. They have difficulty being assertive in situations that require it, or they have a hard time confronting people when difficult emotions are involved. Aspirational alphas may have difficulty telling their employees what to do even though that is part of their job. It will be hard for them to be self-promoting, so they will watch others who are less capable and less experienced get promoted over them. Outside of work they may habitually let others go ahead of them in line, have the good table at the restaurant, or step aside and let someone else ask the more desirable woman on a date.
These are all beta behaviors that, if engaged in from time to time, are not a cause for concern. However, if they represent a lifestyle and if the thought of doing otherwise triggers notable anxiety, these behaviors most likely reflect beta programming that will keep clients from moving forward in their lives. Sometimes people who are wired as betas will create or adopt philosophical and religious beliefs that justify their beta behavior—turn the other cheek, be without ego, take care of everyone else before yourself. And while these are wonderful philosophies, consider the possibility that they relieve betas from facing their fears of being visible.
Social Status in Psychotherapy
Go confidently in the direction of your dreams! Live the life you’ve imagined.
Henry David Thoreau
The central component in any helping relationship is the establishment of a safe and trusting connection. The warmth, acceptance, and positive regard that are characteristics of successful therapists, coaches, teachers, and parents are the opposite of fighting for social dominance. This is not a coincidence—helping and healing relationships have been shaped by our need to activate neural networks related to adaptation, learning, and growth. The need to be in therapy and the need to become a therapist are driven by our deep desire to be seen, feel felt, and to connect with others.
It is always important to keep in mind that each therapeutic relationship has at least two narratives going on at the same time. First is the surface narrative, or the interaction between a warm, supportive therapist and a client who is open to being helped. But the narrative below the surface, the process narrative, is a reenactment of the social status struggles and attachment histories of each individual. Therapist and client come into the consulting room with their own histories that get played out as part of the therapeutic relationship—transference and countertransference. Ignore this level of the relationship and progress may be negated by the activation of primal power dynamics.
From the beginning, one of the great drives of psychotherapy was to forward the process of conscious evolution. The problem with an exclusive focus on this goal in therapy is that we are still primates that retain many of our primitive mammalian sensibilities. We compete for status and the best mates in the same way as other animals. When client and therapist enter the consultation room, they are also animals in competition for survival.
As you will see in Chapter 10, assisting someone on the path to alpha status is different than traditional models of psychotherapy. It is more interactive and outward facing and requires the therapist to also play the role of parent, cheerleader, and sometimes a tough opponent. It involves more of the masculine aspects of reparenting than the maternal qualities that we usually strive for.