Advertisement

Qualitative Sociology

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 229–255 | Cite as

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

  • Lauren A. RiveraEmail author
Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Status Micro-sociology Distinction Exclusion Cultural capital Social capital Bourdieu 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Michèle Lamont, Prudence Carter, Jason Kaufman, Natasha Warikoo, Chana Teeger, Simone Ispa-Landa, members of the Qualitative Analysis seminar at Harvard University, Javier Auyero, and the anonymous reviewers at Qualitative Sociology for helpful comments on previous drafts.

References

  1. Adler, P., & Adler, P. (1996). Preadolescent clique structure and the hierarchy of identity. Sociological Inquiry, 66, 111–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 538–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banaji, M. (2001). Ordinary prejudice. Psychological Science Agenda, 14, 8–10.Google Scholar
  4. Berger, J., & Webster, M. (2006). Expectations, status, and behavior. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 268–300). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berger, J., Fişek, H., Norman, R. Z., & Zelditch, M. (1977). Status characteristics and social interaction: An expectation states approach. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  6. Berger, J., Webster, M., Ridgeway, C., & Rosenholz, S. J. (1986). Status cues, expectations, and behavior. Advances in Group Processes, 3, 1–22.Google Scholar
  7. Bernstein, D. (2005). Hey, bartender, can you break $1,000? New York Times, 18 December.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bunderson, J. S. (2003). Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 557–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cerulo, K. (2000). Overcoming rigid conceptualization: Culture, cognition and new approaches to old ideas. Poetics, 28, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Charmaz, K. (2001). Grounded theory. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research (pp. 335–352). Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  13. Coleman, J. S. (1961). The adolescent society: The social life of the teenager and its impact on education. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Collins, R. (2004). Interaction ritual chains. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cook, K., & Emerson, R. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 43, 721–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Correll, S. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69, 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. DiMaggio, P. (1997). Culture and cognition. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. DiMaggio, P., & Mohr, J. (1985). Cultural capital, educational attainment, and marital selection. The American Journal of Sociology, 90, 1231–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eliasoph, N., & Lichterman, P. (2003). Culture in interaction. The American Journal of Sociology, 108, 735–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Erickson, B. (1996). Culture, class and connections. The American Journal of Sociology, 102, 217–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Espeland, W., & Stevens, M. (1998). Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 313–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Feagin, J. (1991). The continuing significance of race: Anti-black discrimination in public places. American Sociological Review, 56, 101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Foschi, M., Lai, L., & Sigerson, K. (1994). Gender and double standards in the assessment of job applicants. Social Psychology Quarterly, 4, 326–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gambetta, D., & Hamill, H. (2005). Streetwise: How taxi drivers establish their customers’ trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  27. Goldthorpe, J., & Chan, T. W. (2007). Class and status: The conceptual distinction and its empirical relevance. American Sociological Review, 72, 512–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gould, R. (2002). The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. The American Journal of Sociology, 107, 1143–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grant, L. (1984). Black females’ “place” in desegregated classrooms. Sociology of Education, 57, 98–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Grazian, D. (2004). The production of popular music as a confidence game: The case of the Chicago blues. Qualitative Sociology, 27, 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grazian, D. (2007). On the make: The hustle of urban nightlife. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Grigoriadis, V. (2003). A Chelsea girl makes a name all over town. New York Times, 29 June.Google Scholar
  33. Gulati, R. (1995). Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 85–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kingston, P. (2001). The unfulfilled promise of cultural capital theory. Sociology of Education, 74, 88–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lamont, M. (1992). Money, morals, and manners: The culture of the French and American upper-middle class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lamont, M. (2002). The dignity of working men: Morality and the boundaries of race, class, and immigration. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lamont, M. (2009). How professors think: Inside the curious world of academic judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lamont, M., & Lareau, A. (1988). Cultural capital: Allusions, gaps and glissandos in recent theoretical developments. Sociological Theory, 6, 153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lamont, M., & Molnar, V. (2002). The study of boundaries across the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 167–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal childhoods. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  41. Levitt, R., & Candiotti, S. (2009). Students: Chicago nightclub barred blacks. CNN.com. Accessed October 30, 2009. http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/25/illinois.bar.racism.allegations/index.html
  42. Lin, N. (1999). Social networks and status attainment. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 467–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lizardo, O. (2009). Social psychological processes as mechanisms for the explanation of cultural phenomena. San Francisco: Presentation at the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting.Google Scholar
  44. May, R. A. B. (2001). Talkin’ at Trena’s: Everyday conversation at an African American tavern. New York: University Press.Google Scholar
  45. May, R. A. B., & Chaplin, K. (2008). Cracking the code: Race, class, and access to nightclubs in Urban America. Qualitative Sociology, 31, 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Milner, M. (2004). Freaks, geeks, and cool kids: American teenagers, schools, and the culture of consumption. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Parkin, F. (1974). Strategies of social closure in class formation. In F. Parkin (Ed.), The social analysis of class structure (pp. 1–18). London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
  48. Podolny, J. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Rashotte, L., & Webster, M. (2005). Gender status beliefs. Social Science Research, 34, 618–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ridgeway, C. L. (1991). The social construction of status value: Gender and other nominal characteristics. Social Forces, 70, 367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ridgeway, C. L. (2006). Gender as an organizing force in social relations: Implications for the future of inequality. In M. Brinton, F. D. Blau, & D. B. Grusky (Eds.), The declining significance of gender? New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  52. Ridgeway, C. L. (2007). Gender as a group process: Implications for the persistence of inequality. Advances in Group Processes, 24, 311–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on cultural beliefs in social relations. Gender & Society, 18, 510–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ridgeway, C. L., & Walker, H. (1995). Status structures. In K. Cook, G. Fine, & J. House (Eds.), Sociological perspectives on social psychology (pp. 281–310). New York: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  55. Ridgeway, C. L., Backor, K., Li, Y. E., Tinkler, J. E., & Erickson, K. G. (2009). How easily does a social difference become a status distinction? Gender matters. American Sociological Review, 74, 44–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sauder, M. (2005). Symbols and contexts: An interactionist approach to the study of social status. Sociological Quarterly, 46, 279–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sauder, M. (2006). Third parties and status systems: How the structures of status systems matter. Theory & Society, 35, 299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sauder, M. (2009). The influence of intermediaries on organizational status: A theory of status judges. Working paper, University of Iowa.Google Scholar
  59. Sauder, M., & Espeland, W. (2009). The discipline of rankings: Tight coupling and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 74, 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shilling, C. (1993). The body and social theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. Stevens, M. (2007). Creating a class: College admissions and the education of elites. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole Publishing.Google Scholar
  63. Tilly, C. (1998). Durable inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  64. Vaisey, S. (2009). Motivation and justification: A dual-process model of culture in action. American Journal of Sociology, 114, 1675–1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wagner, D., & Berger J. (1993). Status characteristics theory: The growth of a program. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch (Eds.), Theoretical research programs: Studies in the growth of theory. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society. New York: Bedminster Press.Google Scholar
  67. Webster, M. (2003). Working on status puzzles. Advances in Group Processes, 20, 173–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Webster, M., & Driskell, J. (1983). Beauty as status. The American Journal of Sociology, 89, 140–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Williams, A. (2007). Wielding power, bottle by bottle. New York Times, 18 February.Google Scholar
  70. Zerubavel, E. (1999). Social mindscapes: An invitation to cognitive psychology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Zuckerman, E. (1999). The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. The American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1398–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kellogg School of ManagementNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations