Search results

This paper examines social influence in collective task settings using the Berger, Fisek, Norman and Zelditch's graph-theoretic method. The work examines in-group membership in task settings, and models contexts where both status processes and group membership are salient. At the core of these models is a theoretical concept called a group status typification state, defined as an abstract understanding that participants hold of the type of person who would be a good source of information. This paper builds upon recent theory and research and may serve as an initial step toward integration of Status Characteristics Theory and Social Identity Theory.

The use of routines in the decision-making process of individuals, groups and organizations is a well accepted yet taken for granted phenomenon. One goal of organizations is to develop group routines that are efficient, but at the same time flexible. However, this presents a paradox because routines that are efficient at one point in time, or for a particular task, may persist, be unquestioned, and become increasingly inefficient for the group and the organization. This chapter develops a formal theory that describes the processes by which the legitimation of particular group structures impacts the development and use of group routines. The theory presented draws from theories of legitimation, expectation states theory, and institutional theory. The theory formally depicts three sources of legitimation: a referential belief structure (set of cultural beliefs) about expertise and leadership, authorization or superordinate support of a leader, and endorsement (support by group) of a leader. Specifically, the theory addresses: (1) how different sources of legitimation make groups more or less hierarchical; and (2) how the different sources of legitimation make group routines more or less flexible.

This paper aims to examine a consumer segment, Millennial, and its status and conspicuous consumption tendencies. The current research was conducted to determine if handbags can be used as a symbolic representation of status.

A total of 598 females participated in this study through an electronically administered questionnaire. Eastman, Goldsmith, and Flynn's Status Consumption Scale was altered with permission and used to test and measure the status consumption of handbags.

The research findings indicated that handbags are being used in the process of status consumption and suggested characteristics of female Millennial consumers who are likely to use this process.

The findings are limited to 18‐25 year old females in the United States, at a Midwestern university and cannot be generalized to other nationalities or age cohorts. The findings in this study are valuable in adding to the literature on status consumption by examining a product domain not previously studied for its ability to convey status and facilitate a complete self.

The findings are valuable to marketers because defining traits of Millennial consumers, a unique target market, have been discovered and proper marketing tactics may be deployed with the use of these results in the marketplace.

This paper fills a gap in the literature by examining handbags, which have not previously been researched for their status and conspicuous consumption abilities in an appropriate sample of college Millennial aged females.

In this chapter, I detail a procedure for incorporating status characteristics with more than two ordered states, or graded status characteristics, into status characteristics theory. I revise theoretical definitions and assumptions accordingly. The new procedure adds a weighting function to the existing mathematical structure of the theory. I show that estimates using the new procedure are consistent with findings drawn from four experiments that were run in the standard setting for status characteristics theory. I also show that the procedure explains more variation and improves global model fit when predicting expectations using newly collected vignette data. I conclude with a general discussion of the procedures and implications for other expectation states theories and for research conducted outside the laboratory.

Purpose – In this chapter, we review the research on status hierarchies in groups and teams to assess the relative validity of two major models – the dominance and functionalist theories of status hierarchies. We find that these models cannot fully account for empirical evidence in the literature, and thus propose a new model of status hierarchies, Micropolitics.

Methodology/approach – We examine the relative validity of current major theories by reviewing the literature on status hierarchies in groups.

Findings – We find that, although most of the literature supports the functionalist theory of status hierarchies, this theory cannot explain some of the existing empirical evidence. Drawing on both functionalist and dominance perspectives, we propose a new theory of status, the Micropolitics model, to account for this evidence. Specifically, we propose that in the “micro” context of groups and teams, individuals attain status by convincing their group that they possess the skills and abilities needed to take charge – just as political candidates must convince voters they are the right people for the job.

Originality/value of paper – This paper proposes a new theory of status hierarchies in groups that may provide additional explanatory power for status researchers. It suggests that groups strive to attain meritocracy, but may put the wrong people in charge.

(a) To examine “native-born/immigrant” (nativity) and “national/foreign professional credentials” (country of credentials) as status factors in terms of expectation states theory, and (b) to lay out a blueprint for a theory-based, experimental research agenda in this area.

(for (b) above). I propose a research program based on three types of expectation states experimental designs: the open group-discussion, the rejection-of-influence standardized setting, and the application-files format. All three incorporate measures of either biased evaluations or double standards for competence, or of both. I illustrate how these designs can be adapted to assess, through the presence/absence of one or the other of those practices, the separate impacts of nativity, country of professional credentials and selected additional factors on the inference of task competence. The need for and the advantages of systematic, experimental work on this topic are highlighted.

(from (a) above). I review evidence of the status value of nativity and country of credentials through data on evaluations, employment, and earnings. My evidence originates in contemporary Canadian studies that present results from surveys, interviews, census records, and – to a lesser extent – experiments, and these findings support my claim.

The proposed research will facilitate the development of interventions toward the standardized and unbiased assessment of immigrants’ foreign credentials.

The agenda I put forth constitutes a novel approach to the study of nativity and country of credentials. The work will extend the expectation states program, and enhance immigration research both theoretically and methodologically.

The prevalence and multi-system nature of post-COVID-19 symptoms warrants clearer understanding of their work ability implications within the working age population. An exploratory survey was undertaken to provide empirical evidence of the work-relevant experiences of workers recovering from COVID-19.

A bespoke online survey based on a biopsychosocial framework ran between December 2020 and February 2021. It collected quantitative ratings of work ability and return-to-work status, qualitative responses about return-to-work experiences, obstacles and recommendations, along with views on employer benefits for making accommodations. A sample of 145 UK workers recovering from COVID-19 was recruited via social media, professional networks and industry contacts. Qualitative data was subject to thematic analysis. Participants were mainly from health/social care (50%) and educational settings (14%).

Just over 90% indicated that they had experienced at least some post-COVID-19 symptoms, notably fatigue and cognitive effects. For 55%, symptoms lasted longer than six months. Only 15% had managed a full return-to-work. Of the 88 who provided workability ratings, just 13 and 18% respectively rated their physical and mental workability as good or very good. Difficulties in resuming work were attributed to symptom unpredictability, their interaction with job demands, managing symptoms and demands in parallel, unhelpful attitudes and expectations. Manager and peer support was reported as variable.

Workplace health management characterised by flexible long-term collaborative return-to-work planning, supported by more COVID-centric absence policies and organisational cultures, appear pivotal for sustaining the return-to-work of the large segments of the global workforce affected by post-COVID-19 symptoms.

This study examines whether there are unintended consequences that emerge from status interventions in task groups in relation to cohesion and solidarity. Past theorists have argued that inconsistent status structures produce weaker levels of cohesion and solidarity in comparison to consistent status structures.

Data come from an online experiment involving mixed-sex dyads interacting in one of three conditions. Participants individually completed an ambiguous problem-solving task and then worked together over Zoom audio to form a group decision. In the three conditions, participants were either given no performance feedback before the problem-solving task or were informed the male or the female participant performed better on a pretest related to the task. The conversations were recorded and analyzed using measures related to paraverbal synchronization and accommodation.

In terms of self-reported cohesion, there appeared to be a difference, albeit a weak one, in only the inconsistent-status condition, with female participants reporting higher levels of cohesion in comparison to males. However, in terms of solidarity, there was no significant difference between the conditions.

Although inconsistent status structures were associated with weaker perceptions of cohesion, it did not appear to impact solidarity like theorists have suggested. Status structures do not appear to impact group solidarity.

The nature of group membership in conjunction with status consistency/inconsistency may produce the significant differences in solidarity that theorists have suggested.

To date, there has been little empirical examination of how status consistency affects cohesion and solidarity. Relatedly, the current study advances the research on vocal accommodation by analyzing status and solidarity simultaneously.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive analysis of how sentiments may be a part of, or adjacent to, status generalization. We demonstrate why this problem is so difficult to solve definitively, as many resolutions may exist. Sentiments may present the properties of graded status characteristics but may also be disrupted by processes of the self. Sentiments may have status properties enacted within dyadic interactions. However, sentiments may also be status elements during triadic constellations of actors. Finally, we discuss current research that is underway to provide more empirical evidence to offer confirmation or disconfirmation for some of our proposed models.

We provide a synthesis of literatures, including pieces from group processes, neuroscience, psychology, and network scholarship, to address the relation between sentiment and status processes. Accordingly, this is a conceptual chapter.

We attempt to motivate future research by exploring the many complications of examining these issues.

Understanding how social inequalities may emerge during group interaction allows researchers to address their deleterious effects. Positive sentiments (in other words, “liking”) should bring actors closer together to complete tasks successfully. Ironically, when paired with negative sentiments within task groups, inequalities in group opportunities may result. To address these social inequalities, a thorough understanding of how they develop is necessary, so that efficacious interventions can be adopted.

This deep dive into the relation between sentiment and status processes joins the 25-year quest to understand the issues surrounding this relationship.

We survey and organize over fifty years of theoretical research on status and expectation state processes. After defining some key terms in this theoretical approach, we briefly describe theories and branches in the program.

We also focus on a few theories that illustrate distinct patterns of theory growth, using them to show the variety of ways in which the research program has grown.

The program structure developed from a single set of theories on development and maintenance of group inequality in the 1960s to six interrelated branches by 1988. Between 1988 and today, the overall structure has grown to total 19 different branches. We briefly describe each branch, identifying over 200 resources for the further study of these branches.

Although the various branches share key concepts and processes, they have been developed by different researchers, in a variety of settings from laboratories to schools to business organizations. Second, we outline some important issues for further research in some of the branches. Third, we emphasize the value of developing new research methods for testing and applying the theories.

These theories have been used to explain phenomena of gender, racial, and ethnic inequality among others, and for understanding some cases of personality attributions, deviance and control processes, and application of double standards in hiring.

Status and expectation state processes often operate to produce invidious social inequalities. Understanding these processes can enable social scientists to devise more effective interventions to reduce these inequalities.

Status and expectation state processes occupy a significant segment of research into group processes. This chapter provides an authoritative overview of ideas in the program, what is known, and what remains to be discovered.