Class Notes (836,815)
Canada (509,910)
Psychology (7,783)
PSYB10H3 (544)


6 Pages
Unlock Document

Elizabeth Page- Gould

2 Half of Lecture 8  Social status o The extent to which an individual or group is respected or admired by other o Something other people give to you o Their respect gives you good things o It’s something from others eyes o Not something you can claim like you can claim social power o But you can use symbols like clothes to indicate to new comers of your status  Status hierarchies are more volatile and malleable that power hierarchies  Social hierarchies o Formal hierarchies  Explicit set of roles that vary by rank order  CEO, …, Pres, VP, managers, workers o Higher ranking roles have greater value o People will move between roles o But the key to remember is that the hierarchical structure will have roles that remain the same, even though the people filling them will change  Signs of FH:  Job titles  Reporting structures o You report to your boss  Organizational Chart o Indicate boss is at the topmove down  If you can map out hierarchical structure it’s a formal hierarchy  Sources of value in higher-ranked position  Control over resources (power) o You decide who is hired, fired, gets bonuses  Deference from subordinates (status) o You get esteem and status and respect as you move up  Typically an assumption if legitimacy to the hierarchy exists  If you’re at the top, your are the best  We think if you’re at the top, you have the best merit o Informal Hierarchies  Subtle social interactions and cues towards people we pay most attention to tend to rise up  Ranking is not explicit and might bother people if you tell people  This is coolest/lamest friend  Implicit hierarchy  No clearly defined social roles  People who have the most power have the greatest influence on group  Get greater attention from others  Key social capitol that humans have  Paying attention gives status  Attention, Power, and Status o Plays key role in social hierarchies o More attention to higher ranking individuals, less to lower o Attention applies to both higher power and higher status individuals, but we mainly use it with status o Erber and Fiske  When participants thought they’d interact with people who thought they’d have control over whether or not they would receive the prize, they studied their ‘profile’ longer o Deaner, Khera, Platt  Rhesus macaques (monkeys) sitting in chairs- took pictures of faces of four high status and four low status monkeys- all monkeys in this study are midrange in status themselves- in each trial, the monkeys looked to the left for an image, looked to right for juice, how much juice will monkey sacrifice to look at high status, low status monkeys and monkey porn  When looking at low status, they just ignored the low status picture, and drank juice  High status monkey- they sacrificed much more juice, just to look at the high status monkey  Development of hierarchy o Differentiate between individuals and put them in rank o How?  Formal  Differentiation is obvious and more or less merit based  Sorting is a dynamic problem o People can enter and leave the hierarchy without changing/disrupting it much  Leaving job- they’ll replace you o Can move up and laterally in rank  Informal  Differentiation develops spontaneously and rapidly o Rapid speed of impression formation o Hierarchy based on first few minutes of interactions o High agreement between group members and the rank of each individual  Role of Non Verbal Cues in Status Differentiation o Nemeth and Wachtler  When confederate sat on the head table – high status and power- we associate with that person power and ability to influence our opinion  People think confederate was confident, rated as a leader, and viewed them more consistent in their argument o Basis for differentiation is going to vary widely  Rely on dimension that is considered important to the group  This could be a characteristic of a resource  Once this dimension is identified, hierarchy is formed naturally and spontaneously o Individuals achieve higher rank in a group to the extent they represent the defining features of the group  We like people who embody things our culture values o With task-oriented organization  Conscientiousness as a personality trait predicts rank better than extraversion  Like engineering o Socially-oriented organizations  Extraversion predicts rank more than conscientiousness  Like marketing firms o Groups requiring little coordination among members  People with assertive speaking styles receive higher status  Come off as most dominant get higher status o Groups requiring high coordination among members  People with tentative speaking styles receive higher status  Saying I want to say something after you finish, no interrupting  Hierarchy establishes social order  Makes things easier  How do we keep these hi
More Less

Related notes for PSYB10H3

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.