Status Dynamics in Encounters

Chapter

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.

Keywords

Income Assure Stratification Arena Meso 

References

  1. Berger, J. 1958. “Relations Between Performance, Rewards, and Action-Opportunities in Small Groups.” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar
  2. 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
  3. Webster, M. and M. Foschi, Eds. 1998. Status Generalization: New Theory and Research. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Berger, J. and M. Zelditch, Eds. 1985. Status, Rewards, and Influence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Berger, J. and M. Zelditch, Eds. 1998. Status, Power, and Legitimacy: Strategies and Theories. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  6. Wagner, D. G. and J. H. Turner. 1998. “Expectations States Theorizing.” In The Structure of Sociological Theory, 6th Edition, pp. 452–66. Belmont, CA: WadsworthGoogle Scholar
  7. Ridgeway, C. 1982. “Status in Groups: The Importance of Motivation.” American Sociological Review 47:76–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger, J., S. J. Roseholtz, and M. Zelditch, Jr. 1980. “Status Organizing Processes.” Annual Review of Sociology 6:479–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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
  11. Ridgeway, C. L. and J. Berger. 1986. “Expectations, legitimacy, and Dominance in Task Groups.” American Sociological Review 51:603–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 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
  13. Clark, C. 1987. “Sympathy Biography and Sympathy Margin.” American Journal of Sociology 93:290–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clark, C. 1990. Misery Loves Company: Sympathy in Everyday Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. Ridgeway, C. and K. G. Erickson. 2000. “Creating and Spreading Status Beliefs.” American Journal of Sociology 106:579–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Homans, G. C. 1951. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
  21. 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
  22. Collins, R. 1975. Conflict Sociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  23. Collins, R. 2004. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Maryanski, A. and J. H. Turner. 1992. The Social Cage: Human Nature and The Evolution of Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Turner, J. H. and A. Maryanski. 2008a. On The Origin of Societies by Natural Selection. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press.Google Scholar
  26. Boehm, C. 1993. Egalitarian Society and Reverse Dominance Hierarchy.” Current Anthropology 34:227–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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
  28. Emerson, R. 1962. “Power-Dependence Relations.” American Sociological Review 17:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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
  30. Lovaglia, M. J. and J. A. Houser. 1996. “Emotional Relations and Status in Groups.” American Sociological Review 61:867–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Turner, J. H. 2010a. Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume I on Macrodynamics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Turner, J. H. 2011. Theoretical Principles of Sociology, Volume 3: Mesodynamics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. 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

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of California at RiversideRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations