According to the theory of status characteristics, both status characteristics and performance information are combined to arrive at a single evaluation of the group member (combining). In this paper, an alternative formulation is proposed which maintains that status characteristics are used as a means of forming evaluations of group members only when members do not have access to performance information. When such information is available, it is used in arriving at an evaluation for the person (balancing). Empirical assessment of these positions indicates that combining occurs when status characteristics and performance information are consistent and that balancing occurs when status characteristics and performance information are inconsistent. Implications for the empirical scope of the theory of status characteristics are considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BalkwellJames W.BergerJosephWebsterMurrayJr.Nelson-KilgerMaxCashenJacqueline n.d. “Processing Status Information: Some Tests of Competing Theoretical Arguments.”Advances in Group Processes, edited by LawlerEdward J.Greenwich, CT: JAI. Forthcoming.
2.
BalkwellJames W.BergerJosephWebsterMurrayJr.Nelson-KilgerMaxCashenJacqueline n.d. 1991. “Processing Status Information: Some Tests of Competing Arguments.” Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Cincinnati, Ohio.
3.
BergerJosephCohenBernard P.ZelditchMorrisJr.1966. “Status Characteristics and Expectation States.” Pp. 29–46 in Sociological Theories in Progress, vol. 1, edited by BergerJosephZelditchMorrisJr.AndersonBoBoston: Houghton Mifflin.
4.
BergerJoseph M.FisekM. HamitNormanRobert Z.ZelditchMorrisJr.1977. Status Characteristics and Social Interaction: An Expectation States Approach. New York: Elsevier.
5.
BergerJosephRosenholtzSusan J.ZelditchMorrisJr.1980. “Status Organizing Processes.”Annual Review of Sociology6: 479–508.
6.
BergerJosephFisekM. HamitNormanRobert Z.WagnerDavid G.1983. “The Formation of Reward Expectations in Status Situations.” Pp. 127–68 in Equity Theory: Psychological and Sociological Perspectives, edited by MessickDavid M.CookKaren S.New York: Praeger.
7.
BergerJosephFisekM. HamitNormanRobert Z.WagnerDavid G.1985. “The Formation of Reward Expectations in Status Situations.” Pp. 215–61 in Status, Rewards, and Influence, edited by BergerJosephZelditchMorrisJr.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
CohenBernard P.1980. Developing Sociological Knowledge: Theory and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.
CookKarenCronkiteRuthWagnerDavid G.1974. “Laboratory of Social Research Manual for Experimenters.”Department of Sociology, Stanford University. Unpublished.
10.
FreeseLeeCohenBernard P.1973. “Eliminating Status Generalization.”Sociometry36: 177–93.
11.
HembroffLarry A.1982. “Resolving Status Inconsistency: An Expectation States Theory and Test.”Social Forces61: 183–205.
12.
HembroffLarry A.MartinMichael W.SellJane1981. “Total Performance Inconsistency and Status Generalization: An Expectation States Formulation.”Sociological Quarterly22: 421–430.
13.
KimberlyJames C., with contributions by Edward W. McCranie, Hugh P. Whitt, and James H. Wiest. n.d. “The Social Psychology of Status Inconsistency: Status Structure and Psychological Processes.” Pp. 75–115 in Change and Strain in Social Hierarchies, edited by HodgeRobert W.StrasserHermannNew Delhi: Adjanta Books International. In press.
14.
KnottnerusDavid1988. “A Critique of Expectation States Theory: Theoretical Assumptions and Models of Social Cognition.”Sociological Perspectives31: 420–45.
15.
MargolinLeslie1985. “A Criticism of the Theory of Status Characteristics: How Applicable is This Theory to Actual Group Experience?” Ph.D. diss. Department of Sociology, University of Nebraska.
16.
MartinMichael W.SellJane1985. “The Effect of Equating Status Characteristics on the Generalization Process.”Social Psychology Quarterly48: 178–182.
17.
McCranieEdward M.KimberlyJames C.1973. “Rank Inconsistency, Conflicting Expectations, and Injustice.”Sociometry36: 152–76.
18.
MeekerBarbara F.Weitzel-O'NeillP. A.1977. “Sex Roles and Interpersonal Behavior in Task-Oriented Groups.”American Sociological Review42: 91–105.
19.
MillsTheodore M.1962. “A Sleeper Variable in Small Groups Research: The Experimenter.”Pacific Sociological Review5: 21–8.
20.
NormanRobert Z.SmithRoyBergerJoseph1988. “The Processing of Inconsistent Status Information.” Pp. 169–187 in Status Generalization: NewTheory and Research, edited by WebsterMurrayFoschiMarthaStanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
21.
ParcelToby L.CookKaren S.1977. “Status Characteristics, Reward Allocation, and Equity.”Sociometry40: 311–24.
22.
PughMeredith D.WahrmanRalph1983. “Neutralizing Sexism in Mixed-Sex Groups: Do Women Have to Be Better than Men?”American Journal of Sociology88: 746–62.
23.
SellJaneFreeseLee1984. “The Process of Eliminating Status Generalization.”Social Forces63: 538–54.
WileyMary GlennEriksonArlene1983a. “Gender Expectations: Slippery Rungs on the Corporate Ladder.”Sociological Focus16: 99–106.
26.
WileyMary GlennEriksonArlene1983b. “Scaling the Corporate Ladder: Sex Differences in Expectations for Performance, Power, and Mobility.”Social Psychology Quarterly46: 351–59.
27.
ZelditchMorrisJr.LauderdalePatrickStublarecSteven1980. “How Are Inconsistencies between Status and Ability Resolved?”Social Forces58: 1025–43.
