Status Characteristics Theory Research Articles

Foreign‐Born Academic Scientists and Their Interactions with Industry: Implications for University Technology Commercialization and Corporate Innovation Management

This study examines and characterizes the way foreign‐born academic scientists interact with private firms. Using status characteristics theory, this inquiry explores how foreign‐born tenured and tenure‐track academic scientists in the 150 most research‐intensive U.S. universities interact with the private sector by means of six discrete interaction modes. The study further investigates whether foreign‐born academic scientists' interactions with private firms are more of a formal or informal nature vis‐à‐vis those of native‐born scientists'. The empirical analysis indicates that foreign‐born academic scientists have lower odds of having been approached by private firms to ask about their research activities, lower odds of having served as a paid consultant to firms, and lower odds of having been engaged in the joint transfer and commercialization of technologies with private firms relative to their U.S.‐born counterparts. In contrast, foreign‐born academic scientists have significantly higher odds of having coauthored scientific articles with private firms than their U.S.‐born counterparts. The paper discusses the implications for university technology commercialization and innovation management in firms.

The Implications of Social Neuroscience for Expectation States Theories

AbstractWe review recent findings from the social neuroscience literature that links status differentiation between individuals to neurological processes, and draw out the implications of those findings for expectation states theories, including its dominant theory of status‐organizing processes – Status Characteristics Theory. Our underlying assumption and implicit argument is that social neuroscience research is useful for both bolstering and corroborating some core sociological claims. In addition, it sheds light on some of the ongoing theoretical debates within sociology. We highlight and discuss the following four social neuroscience findings: 1) Neural activity varies depending on whether an individual is interacting with someone of a lower, equal, or higher status; 2) There is an interplay between status and affect such that status processes may promote the control of emotional reactions; 3) Both men and women are neurologically attuned to high status opposite sex conspecifics; and, 4) Status differences are processed in the same region of the brain as numerical or size differences, and this region is responsible for the coding of information along continuous dimensions. The implications of these points are discussed with respect to sociological theories.

To Be or Not to Be: How do New Venture Teams Assign Task Role Positions?

this study we ask how founding team members allocate task- roles amongst themselves when they come together to launch a new venture. Answering this question is important because founding teams are formed largely based on homophily rather than complementary skills, thus making it is unclear exactly which team members will occupy which particular formal task- role positions; and initial functional structures in new ventures imprint subsequent performance. The predictions drawn from our conceptual framework drawn which was based on status characteristic theory were tested using data from a quasi- experimental design involving an experiential simulation of a new venture, with random assignment of MBA/EMBA participants to founding teams with a mix of pre-specified and idiosyncratic task-roles. Overall our findings suggest that founding teams use both specific cues of task expertise as well as more diffuse cues of general ability to allocate team members to task positions; with diffuse status cues predicting higher ranked positions. Interestingly we also find evidence that when roles are staffed by typical occupants, their venture was likely to create more value; although such typical role occupants also appropriate more of that created value.

"You Get What You Give, or Do You? An Examination of Resource Sharing among Entrepreneurs"

This paper enhances our understanding of differential benefits to actors from social ties by examining the effect of both diffuse and, what I define as, localized status characteristics on the resources actors receive from their alters. It is well established that while networks provide actors with benefits, these benefits are not equal for men and women with female actors receiving fewer, and less valuable, resources. Extant research has attributed gender differences in network benefits to network structure, arguing that men and women are embedded in fundamentally different networks. To the extent that the benefits of social ties are contingent on an actor’s ability to mobilize the resources possessed by alters (Smith 2005, 2007; Marin 2011), this focus on network structure provides a limited explanation. This paper draws on status theory, specifically status characteristics theory, to address this gap. Specifically, I examine whether particular status characteristics result in differences in an actor’s ability to garner resources from alters. Using a unique research setting of complete networks of entrepreneurs, I am able to compare men and women in the same professions who are embedded in the same networks to examine how various sources of status affect the resources an actor receives. This study finds that while women receive fewer referrals than men, this difference is 1) moderated when men and women in the same profession are compared, and 2) mediated (in some cases completely) when men and women with equivalent localized status characteristics are compared. These findings suggest that localized status characteristics reduce the salience of gender for determining the relative benefits actors receive from social ties.

Do Women Managers Ameliorate Gender Differences in Wages? Evidence from a Large Grocery Retailer

Women's disadvantages in labor market outcomes are often attributed to the preponderance of men at or near the top of organizational hierarchies. While theories of homophily predict that women in positions of power ameliorate gender differences in wages for employees under them, status characteristics theory suggests that women face comparable disadvantages when working under men and women. Despite the existence of competing theoretical perspectives, there is little empirical work investigating the effect of women in positions of organizational power on gender inequality among their subordinates. This study makes an important contribution to this literature by using employment records from 3,707 employees at a large U.S.-based grocery retailer over nine years to examine how the gender gap in wages varies in establishments with male and female managers. Consistent with status characteristics theory, the authors find no significant differences between male and female managers in terms of gender-based wage inequality among their employees.

Offshore-Onsite Subgroup Dynamics In Globally Distributed Teams

Purpose: The increased use of distributed work arrangements across organizational and national borders calls for in-depth investigation of subgroup dynamics in globally distributed teams (GDTs). This paper focuses on the social dynamics that emerge across subgroups of onsite-offshore teams and affect the process of knowledge sharing. Methodology/Approach: We conducted a qualitative study of 8 GDTs working around the clock. These GDTs were part of organizations involved in offshoring of knowledge intensive work. Findings: Our evidence shows that the specific status cue of being onsite drives status differentials across subgroups; these differentials are reduced when the client is directly involved with the activities of the team. The negative effect of high status differentials on knowledge sharing is mitigated by the presence of straddlers, who assist in the transfer of codified knowledge. Conversely, when status differentials are low, straddlers hamper spontaneous direct learning between onsite members and offshore members. Practical implications: Our work has practical implications for organizations that want to use GDTs to achieve a faster (and cheaper) development of products and services. Managers should carefully design the organizational structures of GDTs and consider upfront the trade offs related to client involvement in teamwork and the use of straddlers across sites. Originality/value of paper: The paper contributes to the literature on subgroup dynamics, applying and extending the theory of status characteristics theory.

The Organizational Selection of Status Characteristics: Status Evaluations in an Open Source Community

Organizations mediate societal cultural belief systems and group-level encounters by filtering, and sometimes transforming, social information regarding which status characteristics are salient during group encounters embedded within organizations. This study uses status characteristics theory to add to our understanding of social status within organizations by explaining why organizations matter in determining which status characteristics will be activated within task groups. By analyzing status rankings within an organization of open source software programmers, we find that the organization develops its own unique shared belief system, which inculcates actors with beliefs about status characteristics that are potentially unique within the boundaries of the organization. Specifically, in this study we find that through a process of status generalization, organizational members create new status markers (location) that are potentially only meaningful for the given social situation, and they selectively nullify others (education and age). To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first work in the expectation states tradition to demonstrate an outcome for an organization-level selection process for status characteristics. This paper adds to status characteristics theory by empirically analyzing how organizational contexts create boundaries around groups in which new and extant status characteristics are activated and in which predefined characteristics inherited from more global, society-level contexts are deactivated.

Talking with Me or Talking at Me? The Impact of Status Characteristics on Doctor-Patient Interaction

Over the last two decades, the way doctors and patients interact has changed. There has been a shift away from what Talcott Parsons described as a paternalistic model of interaction to a more collaborative, participatory, patient-centered model of interaction. Yet not all interactions between doctors and patients are collaborative. Using status characteristics theory, the authors hypothesized that medical encounters are more likely to be physician dominated when the status differences between doctors and patients are higher. They tested hypotheses about race, gender, and socioeconomic status differences between doctors and patients. The authors found support for the hypotheses, especially regarding status differences for race and gender. Doctor-patient interactions were most physician-centered when doctors had higher status than patients on race (white versus non-white) and gender (male versus female)

Situational determinants of reward allocation: The equity–equality equilibrium model

We conducted a vignette survey to investigate the effects of situational factors—such as a group’s size, the amount of status differentiation among its members, and the type of task on which they work—on respondents’ reports of the “fair allocation” of resources to members of status-heterogeneous task groups. We argue that to the degree that situational factors make productivity, status and competence more relevant, allocators will increase the weight of equity compared to equality, and to the degree that they make the maintenance of positive relations among members relevant, allocators will decrease the weight of equity compared to equality. Each vignette described members of a status-unequal work group with three, four, or five members. We use status characteristics theory to calculate status inequality for each group. Groups’ tasks were described as either regular or temporary, requiring either interdependent or independent relations between coworkers, and involving routine or nonroutine working conditions. Participants from the United States and from Turkey read a series of vignettes and for each wrote what they thought was the fairest salary for each group member. Using reward expectations theory, our balance model and reported allocations, we estimate empirically the weight of equity for respondents and vignettes. All of the situational factors we identify do affect the equity–equality balance, though some only in interactions. We demonstrate that our balance model of distributive justice provides a useful instrument to capture these effects.

Gender and Entrepreneurship as a Career Choice

The gender gap in entrepreneurship has typically been understood through women’s structural disadvantages in acquiring the resources relevant for successful business ownership. This study builds on resource-based approaches to investigate how cultural beliefs about gender influence the process by which individuals initially come to identify entrepreneurship as a viable labor-market option. Drawing on status characteristics theory, this study evaluates (1) how cultural beliefs about gender and entrepreneurship influence self-assessments of entrepreneurial ability, and (2) the extent to which such assessments account for the gender gap in business start-ups. Results suggest that women are significantly less likely to perceive themselves as able to be an entrepreneur and they hold themselves to a stricter standard of competence when compared to similarly situated men. This gender difference in self-assessments accounts for a significant portion of the gender gap in entrepreneurship after controlling for relevant resources. Additional analyses reveal that significant gender differences in self-assessed ability persist among established business owners.

Socializing economic theories of discrimination: Lessons from Survivor

This paper draws upon structural social psychological theories of small group dynamics to add predictive power to economic theories of discrimination. We first combine economic models of taste-based discrimination with social identity theory and hypothesize that discrimination is driven mainly by preferences or affinities that follow in-group/out-group boundaries. We also bring together status characteristics theory with economic views on information-based discrimination to alternatively hypothesize that discrimination is primarily driven by expectations of competency that are culturally linked to status characteristics. Predictions from both arguments are tested using data from the reality television show Survivor, a quasi-experimental setting that has compelling advantages for the study of discrimination. Specifically, we model the number of votes for elimination a contestant receives using sex, race, age, education, and group membership as explanatory variables. The results overwhelmingly support our integration of status characteristics theory and information-based models of discrimination. In the early episodes, when strategic considerations should lead contestants to value competency, low status individuals (women, minorities, and older contestants), receive more votes for elimination than high status contestants. However, as predicted from our refinement of information-based discrimination, this pattern is reversed in the later episodes. Here, when strategic considerations disfavor competency, it is high status contestants who are targeted more frequently. In contradiction to taste-based theories, discrimination tied to status characteristics is much more evident than voting according to in-group/out-group membership. We conclude by discussing the implications of our research for contemporary theories of discrimination.

Status Distinctions in Interaction: Social Selection and Exclusion at an Elite Nightclub

Although social status plays a crucial role in the generation and maintenance of social inequalities, how status processes operate in naturalistic social contexts remains less clear. In the following article, I provide a case study of doormen—individuals who simultaneously represent status experts and status judges—at a highly exclusive nightclub to investigate how people draw status distinctions in micro-social settings. Using interview and ethnographic data, I analyze on what bases doormen evaluate the relative worth of patrons and confer the status prize of admission. I find that in making such decisions, doormen drew from a constellation of competence and esteem cues, which were informed by contextually specific status schemas about the relative material, moral, and symbolic worth of particular client groups. Moreover, the ways in which doormen used these cues and schema depended on the identity of the specific patron being evaluated. As such, I argue that processes of interpersonal evaluation and status conferral are contextually specific, culturally embedded, and interpersonally variable. Despite such variations, a patron’s perceived social connections seemed to outweigh other types of cues in admissions decisions. I conclude by discussing these findings in light of both status characteristics theory and Bourdieu’s work on the transubstantiation of capital to suggest that social capital is a powerful status cue that can, under certain conditions, be a more potent source of social distinction and status advantage, or hold a greater conversion value, in systems of stratification than other types of qualities.

Gender Differences in Negotiation: A Status Characteristics Theory View

In this conceptual article, the basis for status as an antecedent of gender differences in negotiated outcomes is developed. Because of diffuse status characteristics, men are perceived to be of higher status. Two key implications of higher status include greater perceived competence and increased legitimacy of actions that reinforce status. Specifically within a negotiation context, these implications legitimize the “right” of higher status parties to offer proposed agreements and to have them viewed as coming from a competent source. Based on our model, we propose that men are better able than women to balance the simultaneous needs to compete and to cooperate in negotiation.

English Language Learner Status In A Predominantly European-American School

Using status characteristics theory, this study examined a sixth-grade Korean student’s experiences associated with English literacy learning while attending a predominantly European-American school in the United States. Of particular interest was the interaction between race, culture, and learning in a classroom where the mainstream teachers, students, and the English language learner experienced poor communication and unequal social relationships when addressing academic and literacy tasks. The study’s findings suggest that the teacher’s perceptions of and inexperience with culturally and racially different students contributed to the classroom social dynamics, thereby influencing the English language learner’s class interactions and participation in literacy activities. This study provides critical insight for educators regarding the importance of social acceptance and equal status in a teaching and learning relationship in the mainstream classroom with English language learners.

The Diversity Education Dilemma: Exposing Status Hierarchies Without Reinforcing Them

A diversity education dilemma occurs when exposure to information concerning status hierarchies, related to demographic and other socially salient identity groups, reinforces those hierarchies in the classroom. Discussions of diversity-related issues in a variety of management courses (e.g., immigrant issues in labor relations, the composition of executive leadership teams in strategy, workplace compliance issues in human resource management) may highlight or draw attention to status differences as individuals identify with—and are identified by others as belonging to—higher or lower status groups (e.g., based on race/ethnicity, gender, or physical disability). As a consequence, the “real world” status hierarchy is strengthened within the classroom with negative consequences for student learning. This study uses status characteristics theory to provide a framework for understanding ways in which one’s best-intended practices may be undermining student learning. The authors also propose a series of practical ways that instructors can mitigate the status hierarchy to create a more equitable learning environment while simultaneously tackling issues related to diversity.

Offshore‐onsite subgroup dynamics in globally distributed teams

PurposeThe increased use of distributed work arrangements across organizational and national borders calls for in‐depth investigation of subgroup dynamics in globally distributed teams (GDTs). The purpose of this paper is to focus on the social dynamics that emerge across subgroups of onsite‐offshore teams and affect the process of knowledge sharing.Design/methodology/approachA qualitative study of eight GDTs working around the clock is conducted. These GDTs are part of organizations involved in offshoring of knowledge intensive work.FindingsThe evidence shows that the specific status cue of being onsite drives status differentials across subgroups; these differentials are reduced when the client is directly involved with the activities of the team. The negative effect of high status differentials on knowledge sharing is mitigated by the presence of straddlers, who assist in the transfer of codified knowledge. Conversely, when status differentials are low, straddlers hamper spontaneous direct learning between onsite members and offshore members.Practical implicationsThis work has practical implications for organizations that want to use GDTs to achieve a faster (and cheaper) development of products and services. Managers should carefully design the organizational structures of GDTs and consider upfront the trade offs related to client involvement in teamwork and the use of straddlers across sites.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to the literature on subgroup dynamics, applying and extending the theory of status characteristics theory.

Facts & artifacts in research: The case of communication medium, gender, and influence

Researchers have used status characteristics theory (SCT) to explain the relationship between gender beliefs and interactional disadvantages faced by women in mixed-sex task settings. Several recent studies raise questions about the theory’s findings concerning gender differences in influence, leading some to speculate that prestige differences between women and men are disappearing. We share the view that inconsistencies in sex-related differences are often explained by methodological dissimilarities. Possible changes in cultural beliefs about gender are confounded with protocol changes and also differences in communication medium across SCT studies, thereby making it difficult to determine whether recent findings reflect cultural changes or methodological artifacts. We conducted a laboratory experiment examining the effects of gender status and communication medium on influence, controlling for protocol details. The results suggest that gender is “alive and well” as a status characteristic and, most interestingly, that partner visibility appears to affect status processes by enhancing status differentiation. Our approach and the implications of our results are discussed with reference to the more general issue of the importance of systematic replication for theory growth in social science research.

A Balancing Act: The Interplay of Status Effects on Dominance in Virtual Teams

Findings from a previous study indicate that dominance was a key inhibitor of creativity in virtual teams. This study extends understanding of dominance through an in-depth, qualitative analysis of eight virtual teams. Two research questions are addressed: (1) how is dominance manifested in virtual teams? and (2) why does dominance occur in some teams, and not others? Findings indicate that dominance occurred in three different patterns. Although both males and females dominated, a commonality across patterns was that the dominant individual belonged to the majority sex in each team. Furthermore, dominance was driven by a combination of a few team member status traits. When one or more status markers belonged to a single person - the dominant member - and were absent in other team members, dominance was pronounced. In teams that did not experience dominance, these status indicators were spread across multiple members. Additionally, even though all teams communicated strictly via asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC), equalization was not evidenced in the majority of teams. Status characteristics theory and proportional representation theory provide a basis to explain the prevalence, as well as the absence, of dominance in these virtual teams.

Power, Status, and Affect Control

Power, status, and the evaluation, potency, and activity dimensions of affect control theory may be interrelated to a degree allowing for bridges between these theories. This paper makes two preliminary hypotheses: (1) Occupational power will significantly predict occupational status and (2) The potency of an occupation will significantly predict the power of the occupation. Two reliable scales developed from theories of power and status tap respondents' assessment of the power and status of various occupations. Two samples of undergraduates at a large Midwestern university rate the power and status of different but overlapping lists of occupations. Results are consistent across samples and support both hypotheses. Regression analyses produce coefficients establishing affect control theory's EPA (evaluation, potency, and activity) profiles for the fundamental concepts of power from network exchange theory and status from status characteristics theory. These profiles may be useful for theoretical development bridging fundamental theories of group processes.

Accentuate The Positive: Positive Sentiments And Status In Task Groups

We explore the capacity of positive sentiments, those enduring affective states one achieves when one likes another, to impact status structures. Do positive sentiments combine with existing aspects of interaction to create status hierarchies and potentially change the social order, or do they moderate the effects of extant structure by dampening the magnitude of status differences? Using the theoretical framework of Status Characteristics Theory (SCT) and the Camilleri-Berger model of decision-making, we designed an experiment to adjudicate between these two potentialities. Participation in the study consisted of 168 students. Results found support for the notion that positive sentiments moderate the effects of structural factors on indicators of social status; interestingly, this moderation effect varies by gender. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings, and new directions for research concerning sentiment and status processes.