Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and Matt Hancock may not be your favorite answers when you think of famous bodybuilders.
But you might be surprised to know that conservative men are considered physically stronger than liberals, according to scientists.
The University of Arkansas-led study conducted four experiments to investigate the link between political orientation and chiseled physique.
It found that men with a stronger upper body were perceived as more right-wing, which experts linked to their increased competitiveness.
“There is always the possibility that politicians rely on these stereotypes when making their decisions, but I don’t necessarily have data to support these claims,” Dr Mitch Brown, an evolutionary psychologist and lead author, told MailOnline.
Boris Johnson pumps iron in 2020 at The Gym in his South Ruislip constituency
“That said, physically strong men are indeed more likely to embrace conservative views (or at least what we consider conservative in our modern vernacular).
“Think of political ideology as a means of self-interest.”
As part of the study, experts recruited 203 students, including 153 women, 49 men and one ‘undisclosed’ individual.
These participants were asked to guess the political opinions of eight men while simultaneously ranking their strengths.
Scientists also used scenario questions to gauge this, asking participants to select the men who were more likely to oppose higher taxes, abortion or immigration.
The results showed that conservative men were generally seen as stronger, perhaps because of the innate competitiveness of right-wing politics.
However, weak men were seen as neither conservative nor liberal, increasing uncertainty about these patterns.
“Strong men have significant bargaining power which historically would have made it easier for them to win competitions for resources,” continued Dr. Brown.
“As they gained access to resources, they would have climbed the hierarchies, codifying social norms of competition in which they had a competitive advantage.
Scientists claim that more right-wing figures, such as Donald Trump and Matt Hancock, are seen as physically strongest
Pictured: Two of the sample bodies provided by the study, with the left side marked ‘strong’ and the other marked ‘weak’
Participants were asked to rate on a scale of one to seven whether these bodies were also ‘strong’ or ‘weak’
‘Physically weaker people did not have that power and would actually prefer group norms that are less competitive.’
Despite this, some clinical psychologists, including Dr. Gurpreet Kaur and Dr. Louise Goddard-Crawley – question the validity of these claims.
“While political beliefs are shaped by a complex interplay of personal experiences, values and socio-cultural factors, it is critical to recognize that these are only correlations and do not imply causation,” Dr Kaur said.
“People with different political orientations may have different levels of physical strength, and it is not a reliable indicator of their political beliefs.”
Dr. Goddard-Crawley added: ‘Human behavior is incredibly complex and influenced by a wide range of factors, including genetics, upbringing, personal experiences and more.
‘Attempts to explain political orientation solely on the basis of physical strength oversimplify the issue.
‘Perceptions of physical strength can be subjective and influenced by cultural or personal biases. What someone considers ‘strong’ or ‘weak’ can vary widely.”
The authors acknowledge this as a limitation, writing: “Our findings only indicate the presence of a stereotype for formidable men, but not whether demonstrating formidability is a truthful signal of ideology.”
But Dr. Brown also told MailOnline: ‘Correlation does not imply causation, yes, but this particular study is not about a correlation.
‘This is ultimately a study to see if there is a lay heuristic in which strong men are considered conservative (i.e. a stereotype). It could be that these stereotypes reflect some truth.
‘Future research should assess the previously identified association between strength and conservatism while also examining whether observers can accurately track people’s ideology through this morphology.’