Self-Initiated Status Transfer

Abstract

In collectively oriented task groups in which people are differentiated on status, the status characteristics tend to determine the relative power and prestige position of the group members. The current study suggests that it may be possible for a task group member, using his or her association with an accepted higher status “source,” to influence other members of an equal status group. The authors examine influence patterns in task groups when one group member is associated with a higher status person or source. Forty undergraduate students participated in a standardized experiment in which both the participants and their partners were equally low in status. Results indicate that being associated with a high-status, high-ability non-group member raises the status of an otherwise low-status partner.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Berger, J. , Cohen, B. P. , & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1972, June). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37, 241-255.

Berger, J. , Fisek, M. H. , & Norman, R. Z. (1989). The evolution of status expectations: A theoretical extension. In J. Berger , M. Zelditch, Jr. , & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress: New formulations (pp. 100-130). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Berger, J. , Fisek, M. H. , Norman, R. Z. , & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier.

Berger, J. , Webster, M., Jr. , Ridgeway, C. , & Rosenholtz, S. J. (1986). Status cues, expectations, and behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Driskell, J. E. , Olmstead, B. , & Salas, E. (1993). Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 51-60.

Granovetter, M. (1973). The importance of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380.

Humphreys, P. , & Berger, J. (1981). Theoretical consequences of status characteristics formulation. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 953-983.

Mohr, P. B. (1986). Demeanor, status cue, or performance? Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 228-236.

Moore, J. C., Jr. (1985). Role enactment and self identity: An expectation states approach. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status, rewards, and influence: How expectations organize behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

10.

Munroe, P. T. , Tootell, G. , & Kuhn, T. S. (1995). Agreement as a function of initial choice and stay response probabilities in status characteristics research. Small Group Research, 26, 427-441.

11.

Nelson-Kilger, M. (1992, August). Status gains and status losses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, CA.

12.

Ridgeway, C. L. , & Berger, J. (1988). The legitimation of power and prestige orders in task groups. In M. Webster, Jr. , & M. Foschi (Eds.), Status generalization: New theory and research (pp. 207-231). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

13.

Ridgeway, C. L. , & Diekema, D. (1989). Dominance and collective hierarchy formation in male and female task groups. American Sociological Review, 54, 79-93.

14.

Troyer, L. , & Younts, C. W. (1997). Whose expectations matter? The relative power of first-and second-order expectations in determining social influence. American Journal of Sociology, 103(3), 692-732.

15.

Wagner, D. G. , & Berger, J. (1993). Status characteristics theory: The growth of a program. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Theoretical research programs: Studies in the growth of theory (pp. 23-63). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

16.

Webster, M., Jr. , & Driskell, J. E. (1978). Status generalization: A review and some new data. American Sociological Review, 43, 220-236.

17.

Webster, M., Jr. , & Foschi, M. (1988). Overview of status generalization. In M. Webster, Jr. , & M. Foschi (Eds.), Status generalization: New theory and research. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

18.

Webster, M., Jr. , & Sobieszek, B. (1974). Sources of evaluation: A formal theory of significant others and social influence. New York: Wiley & Sons.

19.

Webster, M., Jr. , & Whitmeyer, J. M. (1999). A theory of second-order expectations and behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62(1), 17-31.

20.

Yamagishi, T. , Gillmore, M. R. , & Cook, K. S. (1988). Network connections and the distribution of power in exchange networks. American Journal of Sociology, 93, 833-851.