The complex relationship between power and status requires clarification. Why does power seem to confer more status in some situations than in others? Theoretical ideas used to answer this question come from three major areas of social psychology: exchange theories ofpower, the status characteristics and expectation states theoretical research program, and attribution research. Results of an experiment provided partial supportfor the main hypothesis derivedfrom the theory: Differences in status will result consistent with power differences between actors. Power differences produced differences in expectations of ability on selfreport measures but not on a behavioral measure of interpersonal influence. Although knowledge about the power structure was predicted to reduce the status derivedfrom power, no effect of knowledge wasfound. During the experiment, participants'emotional reactions were observed to play a role in the relationship between power and status.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Balkwell, J. W. (1991). From expectations to behavior: An improved postulate for expectation states theory. American Sociological Review, 56, 355-369.
2.
Berger, J. , Cohen, B. P., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37, 241-255.
3.
Berger, J. , & Conner, T. L. (1974). Performance expectations and behavior in small groups: A revised formulation. In J. Berger, T. L. Comer, & M. H. Fisek (Eds.), Expectation states theory: A theoretical research program (pp. 85-109). Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
4.
Berger, J. , Conner, T. L., & McKeown, W. L. (1974). Evaluations and the formation and maintenance of performance expectations. In J. Berger, T. L. Comer, & M. H. Fisek (Eds.), Expectation states theory: A theoretical research program (pp. 27-51). Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
5.
Berger, J. , Fisek M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Wagner D. G. (1985). Formation of reward expectations in status situations. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status, rewards, and influence (pp. 215-261). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6.
Berger, J. , Fisek, M. H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier.
7.
Berger, J. , Norman R. Z., Balkwell, J., & Smith, R. F. (1992). Status inconsistency in task situations: Atest of four status processing principles. American Sociological Review, 57, 843-855.
8.
Berger, J. , Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 470-508.
9.
Berger, J. , Wagner, D. G., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1985). Introduction: Expectation states theory: Review and assessment. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status, rewards, and influence (pp. 1-72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Berger, J. , Zelditch, M., Jr., Anderson, B., & Cohen, B. P. (1972). Structural aspects of distributive justice: A status value formulation. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch, Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress (Vol. 2, pp. 119-146). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
11.
Bierhoff, H. W. , Buck E., & Klein, R. (1986). Social context and perceived justice. In H. W. Bierhoff, R. L. Cohen, & J. Greenberg (Eds.), Justice in social relations (pp. 165-185). New York: Plenum.
12.
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory ofpsychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
13.
Brehm, S. S. , & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory offreedom and control. New York: Academic Press.
14.
Cook, K. S. (1970). Analysis of a distributive justice experiment: Goal objects and task performance expectations. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.
15.
Cook, K. S. , & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 43, 721-739.
16.
Cook, K. S. , Emerson, R. M., Gillmore, M. R., & Yamagishi, T. (1983). The distribution of power in exchange networks: Theory and experimental results. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 275-305.
17.
Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31-40.
18.
Fisek, M. H. , Berger, J., & Norman, R. Z. (1991). Participation in heterogeneous and homogeneous groups: A theoretical integration. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 114-142.
19.
Foschi, M. , Sigerson, K., Lai, L., & Foschi, R. (1990, April). A computerized setting for expectation states research. Paper presented to the West Coast Conference on Small Group Research, Lewis and Clark College, Portland, OR.
20.
Gerth, H. H. , & Mills, C. W. (1958). From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Galaxy.
21.
Gilbert, D. T. , & Jones, E. E. (1986). Perceiver-induced constraint: Interpretations of self-generated reality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 269-280.
22.
Gilbert, D. T. , Jones, E. E., & Pelham, B. W. (1987). Influence and inference: What the active perceiver overlooks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 61-870.
23.
Harrod, W. J. (1980). Expectations from unequal rewards. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43, 126-130.
24.
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 51, 358-374.
25.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
26.
Houser, J. A. , & Lovaglia, M. J. (1993, August). Emotional reactions, status characteristics and social interaction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Miami Beach, FL.
27.
Jones, E. E. (1986). Interpreting interpersonal behavior: The effects of expectancies. Science, 234, 41-46.
28.
Jones, E. E. , & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 219-266.
29.
Jones, E. E. , & Goethals, G. R. (1971). Order effects in impression formation: Attribution context and the nature of the entity. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelly, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 27-46). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
30.
Kemper, T. D. , & Collins, R. (1990). Dimensions of microinteraction. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 32-68.
31.
Kerlinger, F. N. , & Pedhazur, E. J. (1973). Multiple regression in behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
32.
Lenski, G. (1966). Power and privilege: A theory of social stratification. New York: McGraw-Hill.
33.
Lovaglia, M. J. (1992). Power and status: Exchange, attribution and expectation states. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
34.
Markovsky, B. , Willer, D., & Patton, T. (1988). Power relations in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 53, 220-236.
35.
Molm, L. D. (1985). Gender and power use: An experimental analysis of behavior and perceptions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 285-300.
36.
Moore, J. C., Jr. (1985). Role enactment and self identity. In J. Berger, D. G. Wagner, & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Status, rewards and influence: How expectations organize behavior (pp. 262-315). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
Ridgeway, C. (1990, August). The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Paper presented at the 85th annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Washington, DC.
38.
Ridgeway, C. , & Diekema, D. (1989). Dominance and collective hierarchy formation in male and female task groups. American Sociological Review, 54, 79-93.
39.
Samuel, Y. , & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1989). Expectations, shared awareness, and power. In J. Berger, M. Zelditch, Jr., & B. Anderson (Eds.), Sociological theories in progress: New formulations (pp. 288-312). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
40.
Shelly, R. K. (1993). How sentiments organize interaction. In E. J. Lowler, B. Marcousky, K. Heimer, & J. O'Brien (Eds.), Advances in Group Processes, Vol. 1O (pp. 113-132). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
41.
Skvoretz, J. , & Willer, D. (1991). Power in exchange networks: Setting and structural variations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 224-238.
42.
Stewart, P. A. , & Moore, J. C., Jr. (1992). Wage disparities and performance expectations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55, 78-85.
43.
Wicklund, R. A. , & Brehm, J. W. (1968). Attitude change as a function of felt competence and threat to attitudinal freedom. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 4, 64-75.
