Search results

Basic science, sometimes called “curiosity-driven research” at the National Science Foundation and other places, starts with a question that somehow stays in the mind, nagging for an answer. Such questions really are “puzzles”; they arise in an intellectual field or context, asking someone to fit pieces to an improving but incomplete picture of the social world. What makes a worthwhile puzzle is a missing part in understanding the picture, or a new piece of knowledge that does not seem to fit among other parts. Sometimes creative theorists can imagine a solution to one of the holes in the puzzle. If they are also empirical scientists, they devise ways to get evidence bearing on their ideas, and some of those ideas survive to give more complete and detailed pictures of the world. This chapter is the story of puzzles and provisional solutions to them, developed by dozens of men and women investigating status processes and status structures, using a coherent perspective, for over half a century.¹

Here I present a theory of collective action that emphasizes the role of status. I argue that collective action contributions earn individuals improved status by signaling their concern for the group's welfare relative to their own. Having received greater prestige for their contributions to group goals, individuals’ actual motivation to help the group is increased, leading to greater subsequent contributions to group efforts and greater feelings of group solidarity. This “virtuous cycle” of costly contributions to group efforts and enhanced standing in the group shows one way in which individuals’ prosocial behaviors are socially constructed, a consequence of individuals’ basic concern for what others think of them. I discuss a variety of issues related to the theory, including its scope of application, theoretical implications, relationship to alternative models of reputation and prosocial behavior, possible practical applications, and directions for future research.

This chapter examines the underlying concerns people have for relative status within their group (i.e., intragroup status) and their group's relative status to that of other groups (i.e., intergroup status). I adopt a deductive approach using arguments and evidence in the cross-cultural research and literature. I begin by reviewing the basic findings in social psychology and organizational behavior literatures, which suggest that both intragroup status and intergroup status will have positive impact on important group outcomes such as people's evaluation of, and commitment to, the group. Moreover, consistent with the notion of the fishpond phenomenon, past findings also suggest that those with high-intragroup status and low-intergroup status show more group-oriented reactions than those with low-intragroup status and high-intergroup status (i.e., people prefer to be a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a big pond). Next, I provide both psychological and structural reasoning to argue that the fishpond phenomenon will be less likely to emerge in collectivistic than individualistic cultures. I close by considering the implications from the cross-cultural analysis to the broader conceptual understanding of mechanisms underlying people's concerns for intragroup status vs. intergroup status in work groups and organizations.

Purpose: Because past research has investigated nonverbal behaviors in clusters, it is unclear what status value is ascribed to individual nonverbal behaviors. I test status cues theory to investigate whether response latency functions as a status cue. I explore whether it affects behavioral influence or if it only signals assertiveness and does not have status value. I also explore how one's interpretation of response latency impacts behavioral influence.

Methodology: In a two-condition laboratory experiment, I isolate response latency and test its strength independently, and then I measure behavioral influence, participants' response latency, and perceptions of assertiveness. I also conduct interviews to investigate how participants interpret their partner's response latency to understand how people ascribe different meanings to the same nonverbal behavior.

Findings: I find that response latency alone does not affect behavioral influence, in part because how people interpret it varies. However, response latency does significantly impact participants' own response latency and their perceptions of their partner's assertiveness.

Practical Implications: This research demonstrates the intricacies of nonverbal behavior and status. More specifically, this work underscores important conceptual differences between assertiveness and status, and demonstrates how the interpretation of nonverbal behavior can impact behavioral influence.

This paper seeks to investigate the impact of citrus tristeza virus (CTV) on the commercial value of fruit produced by navel orange trees.

Data are counts of fruit of various sizes and quality harvested from a tree in a year. The counted fruit are converted to a dollar value using a standardized pricing matrix and then normalized as a ratio of the tree value compared to trees in the same orchard and year that were free of virus. Statistical tests determine if trees at various stages of infection have different production values than virus‐free trees.

On average, trees infected with CTV have higher fruit production values than trees that did not contract the virus, after compensating for climate and location differences, even though the presence or absence of CTV explains only about 1 percent of the variation in production value.

Data are from commercially maintained orchards rather than a carefully controlled experiment in an isolated greenhouse environment.

Orange growers in the region should be reluctant to remove trees that have mild strains of CTV. The effects of a tree virus on production value should be a consideration in how to respond to the virus.

Development of a standardized pricing matrix to control for pricing fluctuations from year to year is a relatively novel concept. The applied concepts of tree status cohorts and relative crop values are original and provide valuable tools for combining data from different orchards and climate conditions.

The venture capital syndication brings in various resources for the portfolio firms, which positively affects those firms’ performance, while conflicts within syndicates also have negative impact on the portfolio firms’ performance. This study aims to explore the two opposite effects of the venture capital syndication on the portfolio firms’ operations. Drawing on Ma et al.’s (2013) power source match perspective, the authors examine the effect of (mis)match of power source between ownership and status on the portfolio firms’ performance.

The study uses panel data from two professional databases containing information about the venture capital-backed firms in China. The fixed effect model is applied to analyze the data.

This study found that power source match in the venture capital syndicates works positively on the portfolio firms’ performance. This positive relationship is weakened when there is ownership-dominated power source mismatch present.

This study suggests that when new ventures search for venture capital, it is better to allocate greater ownership to the venture capital providers with high-status power, so that ownership power and status power can have a proper match to increase the coordination among venture capital providers, thereby helping portfolio firms perform better.

This study looks into the performance of a portfolio firm when there is power a (mis)match in a venture capital syndication, extending the current literature in this area where only the performance of the venture syndications is examined.

This exposition explains how Elementary Theory works and how it has been developed over the last two-and-a-half decades. Both increased scope and heightened precision are covered.

Theoretic methodology is explained. Using that method formal models are constructed analogous to empirical events. Those models predict events, design experiments, and guide applications in the field.

There is a widely held belief in sociology that theory becomes more vague and imprecise as its scope broadens. Whereas broader generalizations are more vague than narrower ones, this exposition shows that abstract theory becomes more precise as its scope broadens.

Here implications and limitations are closely connected. Regarding implications, this exposition shows that scientific explanations and predictions are viable today in sociology but only when exact theory is employed. Regarding limitations, the theory and research included in this exposition make clear why the empiricist search for regularities that dominates sociological research is so very limited in its results.

This exposition demonstrates that theory is the method of all the sciences and in particular the science of sociology.

This study aims to integrate social identity and leader–member exchange (LMX) theory to investigate the processes and boundary conditions around LMX–performance relationships. Through the application of two leader–follower subsamples, the authors test three main objectives. What is the effect of multi-dimensional dyad value-congruence on LMX and how does congruence on these dimensions differentially influence leader and follower perceptions of LMX? In a subsample of followers including supervisor-rated performance, the authors develop a model that examines how individual values moderate the effect of dyad contact on supervisor-rated job performance mediated by follower LMX.

The participants for this study include graduate and undergraduate social work students who were taking part in a one-year work placement within a social work organization as well as their immediate supervisors. Across a four-month period, participants filled out measures of their supervisor contact, work values and LMX. Supervisor-rated performance was also included.

Findings from the dyadic subsample show that growth value congruence is a predictor of follower-rated LMX, with value congruence across all values having no effect on leader-rated LMX. Within a subsample of followers, findings suggest that follower-rated LMX mediates the relationship between dyad contact and supervisor-rated job performance, with individual work values moderating this effect.

The current study offers several contributions to the literature on LMX and job performance. First, in this study’s dyadic leader–follower sample, the authors extend propositions made by social identity theory around value congruence and LMX by offering support for a multi-dimensional and multi-target approach to questions of values and LMX. Second, within this study’s larger non-dyadic sample, the authors offer insights into previous conflicting findings around dyad contact and LMX, by offering support for the indirect effect of dyad contact on supervisor-rated performance via LMX. Third, within this second sample, the authors also extend the literature on values and LMX to show that the process through which LMX influences job performance is dependent on follower values.

Status demotion in hierarchical loyalty programs (HLPs) has received considerable academic attention. However, existing research is relatively silent on whether HLP status demotion fosters service relationship fading by influencing demoted customers’ psychological disengagement and the likelihood of patronage reduction. Drawing on the relationship fading literature and the stimulus–organism–response framework, this study aims to examine these effects. It further investigates the moderating role of psychological ownership on the links of status demotion with psychological disengagement and the likelihood of patronage reduction.

Two studies (Studies 1 and 2) were conducted in the context of airline HLPs. Study 1 was a structured survey conducted among 213 demoted airline HLP customers in Australia, and Study 2 was an experiment conducted among 178 executive MBA students in Bangladesh. The PROCESS macro was used to test the moderated mediation model.

The results of both studies show that HLP status demotion significantly influences customers’ psychological disengagement and the likelihood of patronage reduction. The findings also reveal that psychological disengagement mediates the relationship between status demotion and the likelihood of patronage reduction. Further, customers with high (low) psychological ownership feel high (less) psychological disengagement and show high (less) likelihood of patronage reduction due to their HLP status demotion.

This study extends the existing literature on relationship marketing and HLPs by offering a better understanding of how and under what conditions status demotion elicits customers’ psychological disengagement and the likelihood of patronage reduction.