Abstract
Over 30 years of continuing empirical research on status inconsistency (SI) do not permit a final conclusion regarding the empirical tenability of this body of theory. This is primarily due to the fact that the empirical research done so far cannot be regarded as a representative or complete counterpart of the whole body of status inconsistency theory. In particular, the relational concepts elaborated by Johan Galtung have not been exposed to empirical tests yet. Based on a representative probability sample of n=1,717 adolescents attending 7th and 9th grades of secondary school, the present paper provides a multi-level analysis regarding aggression and social conflict, as predicted by some of Galtung's individual-level and aggregate-level rank concepts, respectively. First, rank incongruence is shown to be a source of conflict in the friendship dyad. Secondly, the empirical analysis yields strong evidence in favour of both the criss-cross and rank disequilibrium hypothesis. As expected, the lack of criss-cross turns out to be a structural determinant of aggression. The conflict-preventing function of criss-cross is discussed and the degree of rank disagreement is suggested to be a structural characteristic that may modify this conflict-preventing function of criss-cross. Thirdly, rank disequilibrium is shown to be another major source of aggression and conflict, respectively.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.