Search results

Explaining the development of group solidarity in status-differentiated groups is an interesting theoretical problem because solidarity is usually considered to stem from positive affect in groups of status equals. Analysis of the evolution of human emotions allows the development of social theory focused on the functions of emotions. Human emotions evolved in tandem with the development of status hierarchies as a dominant form of social organization that function to coordinate the work of individuals in groups. Conflicting emotions generated by inequality and intragroup competition interact in status hierarchies to maintain group solidarity. An experimental test using a direct indicator of group solidarity is proposed.

The purpose of this study is to analyze public perceptions of disability and gain insight into the types of health conditions nondisabled people believe should be protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Understanding how the public interprets the ADA could offer perspective on which disabilities are viewed as legitimate and which are not. Data were gathered from a convenience sample of members from local community groups and college classrooms in a metropolitan university setting. Our analyses evaluate the clustering of health condition types due to similar traits and identify which attributes of the health conditions generate this clustering. Results from a series of quantitative and qualitative analyses (e.g., hierarchical cluster analysis, frequency analysis, discourse analysis, etc.) indicate nondisabled respondents perceive physical and cognitive health conditions that are visible, static, and externally acquired as legitimate disabilities that should be protected by the ADA.

Sharon N. Barnartt is professor and department chair in the Department of Sociology at Gallaudet University. She has coauthored two books: Deaf President Now: The 1988 Revolution at Gallaudet University (1995) and Disability Protests: Contentious Politics 1970–1999 (2000). She coedited Disability Studies Quarterly, Special Issue on Deafness, volume 18, issue 2, 1998, and the Journal of Disability Policy Studies: Special Issue on Women and Disability, volume 8, 1997. She has also presented papers and published widely in the areas of gender differences in socioeconomic status, disability policy issues, social movements in the deaf and disability communities, and disability in developing countries. She has been a board member and president of the Society for Disability Studies, member and chair of the American Sociological Association's Committee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities, and chair of the American Sociological Association's Disability and Society Section-in-Formation. She is a founder and coeditor of the Research in Social Science and Disability volume series.

To determine the age at which influence peaks for men and women at work, then use empirical data to develop procedures predicting complex combining effects of diffuse status characteristics.

A survey experiment with a nationally representative sample is used to measure the age at which the status value of men and women at work reaches a maximum. Research results are then incorporated into equations adapted from current status characteristics theory (SCT) procedures to model the combined effects of age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, occupation, and beauty.

Analyses reveal that the status value of men and women reaches a maximum in middle age, and that women reach a maximum status value at work at an earlier age than men.

This approach maintains core assumptions of SCT and uses ongoing research results to calibrate a model predicting complex combining effects of diffuse status characteristics. Limitations include the need to develop additional empirical constants to make predictions in new research settings.

Predictions from the model can be used in hiring situations to adjust for interviewers’ nonconscious expectations related to status characteristics of job applicants.

The disadvantage for women at work that increases through mid-career helps to explain the continuing underrepresentation of women in senior leadership positions. Awareness of the impact of socially valued characteristics like age and gender can help individuals respond more effectively to challenging social situations.

Extend the current SCT model to make predictions in contexts where people are being evaluated such as elections, hiring, and promotions.

This chapter develops and tests a theory on relationships between perceptions of ability and adherence to rules, guidelines, and tradition. Drawing from theory and research on status processes in groups, the theory proposes that adherence to rules can provide an alternative to task ability in demonstrating competence at a group task and that persons who perceive themselves to be low in ability will become especially likely to strictly adhere to rules.

In an experimental study, participants received feedback that they had high or low ability at a group task that involved making judgments about bonuses in a fictitious organization.

Supporting the theory, participants who perceived themselves to be low in ability gave less money to employees technically ineligible for raises, even when the reason for the ineligibility was arguably trivial.

The proposed theory and supportive results have a number of theoretical implications for how status processes shape individual behavior in groups. For example, the theory might help explain collective enforcement against free riding, with people low in ability being motivated to enforce norms against free riding to compensate for their perceived lack of ability to contribute.

It is easy to conjure examples in which persons who are seen as exceptionally competent also seem to be given wide leniency in adhering to rules. The theory and experimental test presented here can help in understanding the extent to which the following of rules may be seen as the domain of the incompetent.

To use a behavioral measure of legitimacy to study how differences in negotiating style and status affect the legitimacy of persons in high-power network positions. Predictions include (1) that powerful network actors who negotiate using a pro-group style will maintain legitimacy better than will those who negotiate selfishly and (2) those higher in status will be granted more legitimacy both before and after exchange than powerful actors lower in status.

An experimental study in which participants were connected in networks to powerful partners who were portrayed as consistently high or low on several status characteristics. Both before and after exchange, participants evaluated partners on a number of dimensions and made decisions on whether to vote to join a coalition to take the partner's power away, a direct behavioral indicator of legitimacy.

High-power partners lost legitimacy over the course of exchange irrespective of whether they negotiated in pro-group or selfish ways, and irrespective of whether they were high or low in status. This effect was pronounced for partners who negotiated selfishly. Although partner status predicted legitimacy prior to exchange, legitimacy evaluations after exchange appeared entirely driven by the partner's negotiating style (how the power was used) and not by status.

The project introduces a new behavioral measure of legitimacy that correlated highly with self-report items and should be of value in future research. The study also indicates promising directions for future research that might disentangle effects of power and status on legitimacy, along with adjudicating among explanations for why this study did not find status effects on legitimacy.

Livingston (2002) shows that bidders in Internet auctions are easily convinced of a seller’s trustworthiness: they bid large amounts even if sellers have barely established a reputation for performance, suggesting that they believe that typical sellers usually perform. This study reinforces this conclusion by looking at how bidders choose which auction to bid in when there are several that are selling the same item. The analysis shows that so long as a seller has some history, bidders consider bidding in the seller’s auction. They then choose auctions that offer the best chance to obtain the good at the lowest price.

Two studies investigate gender and status effects on self-handicapping: selecting actions that can impair future performances, perhaps to protect self-image. Gender socialization and status processes suggest two potential explanations for the consistent finding that men self-handicap more than women. If status differences contribute to the tendency to self-handicap, then holding gender constant, those with high status on other characteristics would self-handicap more than those with low status. In Study 1, men assigned to high-status positions selected less study time (and thus self-handicapped more) than did men assigned to low-status positions. Women assigned high status, however, self-handicapped no more than did women assigned low status. Because study time as a measure of self-handicapping may be confounded with confidence or motivation, a second study assigned status and measured self-handicapping by the selection of performance-enhancing or -detracting music. Study 2 also found that high status increased self-handicapping among men but not among women. Both gender socialization and status processes may play roles in self-handicapping.