Skip to main content

Status Dynamics in Encounters

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume 2
  • 770 Accesses

Abstarct

Status is the most direct link of individuals to social structures, connecting persons to divisions of labor in corporate units and to memberships in categoric units. When individuals know their status and the status of others in an encounter, it becomes much easier for them to understand the meanings of situational ecology and demography, to role-make and role-take, to plug into relevant cultural elements and normatize, to channel motive states in appropriate ways, and to manage emotions. Embedding of an encounter in corporate and categoric units increases the viability of an encounter through establishing the relative status of participants. Conversely, when status is unknown or ambiguous, individuals will need to work much harder to sustain the encounter because, without the capacity to find each other’s locations within corporate and categoric units, they must work to discover the meanings of situational ecology and demography, actively orchestrate gestures to make a role and read the gestures of others to role-take, search for cues about what elements of culture are relevant and appropriate, figure out what motive states are to be mobilized, and discover the feeling and display rules so as to emit the right mix of emotions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Berger, J. 1958. “Relations Between Performance, Rewards, and Action-Opportunities in Small Groups.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J., M. H. Fisek, R. Z. Norman, and M. Zelditch, Jr. 1977. Status Characteristics and Social Interaction: An Expectation-States Approach. New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, M. and M. Foschi, Eds. 1998. Status Generalization: New Theory and Research. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J. and M. Zelditch, Eds. 1985. Status, Rewards, and Influence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J. and M. Zelditch, Eds. 1998. Status, Power, and Legitimacy: Strategies and Theories. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, D. G. and J. H. Turner. 1998. “Expectations States Theorizing.” In The Structure of Sociological Theory, 6th Edition, pp. 452–66. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. 1982. “Status in Groups: The Importance of Motivation.” American Sociological Review 47:76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. and C. Johnson. 1990. “What is the Relationship Between Socioemotional Behavior and Status in Task Groups?” American Journal of Sociology 95:1189–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J., S. J. Roseholtz, and M. Zelditch, Jr. 1980. “Status Organizing Processes.” Annual Review of Sociology 6:479–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, R. Z., R. Smith, and J. Berger. 1988. “The Processesing of Inconsistent Information.” In Status Generalization: New Theory and Research. M. Webster and M. Foschi, Eds. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. and J. Berger. 1986. “Expectations, legitimacy, and Dominance in Task Groups.” American Sociological Review 51:603–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. and J. Berger. 1988. “The Legitimation of Power and Prestige Orders in Task Groups.” In Status Generalization: New Theory and Research. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. 1987. “Sympathy Biography and Sympathy Margin.” American Journal of Sociology 93:290–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. 1990. Misery Loves Company: Sympathy in Everyday Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. 1998. “Where Do Status Beliefs Come From?” In Status, Network, and Structure. J Szmatka and J. Berger, Eds. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. 2001. “Inequality, Status, and the Construction of Status Beliefs.” In Handbook of Sociological Theory, J. Turner, Ed. New York: Kluwer/Plenum, pp. 323–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. 2006. “Status and Emotions From an Expectation States Theory.” In J. E. Stets and J. H. Turner, Eds. Handbook of The Sociology of Emotions. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. and K. G. Erickson. 2000. “Creating and Spreading Status Beliefs.” American Journal of Sociology 106:579–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C., E. Boyle, K. Kulpers, and D. Robinson. 1998. “How Do Status Beliefs Develop? The Role of Resources and Interaction.” American Sociological Review 63:331–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homans, G. C. 1951. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. 1994. “Affect.” In Group Processes: Sociological Analyses, M. Foschi and E. J. Lawler, Eds. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall, pp. 205–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. 1975. Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, R. 2004. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maryanski, A. and J. H. Turner. 1992. The Social Cage: Human Nature and The Evolution of Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H. and A. Maryanski. 2008a. On The Origin of Societies by Natural Selection. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, C. 1993. Egalitarian Society and Reverse Dominance Hierarchy.” Current Anthropology 34:227–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, J. 1988. “Directions in Expectation States Research.” In Status Generalization: New Theory and Research, M. Webster and M. Foschi, Eds. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. 1962. “Power-Dependence Relations.” American Sociological Review 17:31–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovaglia, M. J. 1997. “Status Emotion, and Structural Power.” In Status, Network, and Structure, J. Skvoretz and J. Berger, Eds. New York: Guilford, pp. 159–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovaglia, M. J. and J. A. Houser. 1996. “Emotional Relations and Status in Groups.” American Sociological Review 61:867–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houser, J. A. and M. J. Lovaglia. 2002. “Status, Emotion, and the Development of Solidarity in Stratified Task Groups. Advances in Group Processes 19:109–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H. 2010a. Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume I on Macrodynamics. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. H. 2011. Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume 3: Mesodynamics. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Annett, J. and R. Collins. 1975. “A Short History of Deference and Demeanor.” In Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science, R. Collins, Ed. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan H. Turner .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Turner, J.H. (2010). Status Dynamics in Encounters. In: Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume 2. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6225-6_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics