Book contents
- Developing Theories in the Social Sciences
- Methodological Tools in the Social Sciences
- Developing Theories in the Social Sciences
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Tables
- Preface: Do We Need Theories?
- 1What Is a Theory?
- 2Concepts
- 3Logical Sentences and Truth
- 4Types of Reasoning and Definitions
- 5Testing Theory
- 6Developing a Theory of Status Effects
- 7Public Good Theory and Research: Public Good Theory and Research
- 8Avoiding Common Missteps
- Index
- References
6 - Developing a Theory of Status Effects
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 May 2026
Book contents
- Developing Theories in the Social Sciences
- Methodological Tools in the Social Sciences
- Developing Theories in the Social Sciences
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Tables
- Preface: Do We Need Theories?
- 1What Is a Theory?
- 2Concepts
- 3Logical Sentences and Truth
- 4Types of Reasoning and Definitions
- 5Testing Theory
- 6Developing a Theory of Status Effects
- 7Public Good Theory and Research: Public Good Theory and Research
- 8Avoiding Common Missteps
- Index
- References
Summary
The theory of status effects illustrates one important manner in which theories can develop. Regularities in groups faced with tasks requiring group interaction were observed over a wide variety of tasks. Status inequality in particular was obvious. Some group members had more influence and were given more opportunities to interact than others, even when expertise did not differentiate among individuals. Further such inequality seemed reciprocal: group members permitted the inequality and allowed it to stabilize. Researchers developed abstract concepts and propositions to account for these regularities and concluded that inequality arises because the task interaction causes individuals to form performance expectations for themselves and others, and once those expectations form, they affect the distribution of all behavioral components of interaction.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Developing Theories in the Social SciencesMethods and Applications, pp. 66 - 91Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2026
References
References
Andreas, Holger. 2021. “Theoretical Terms in Science,” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall ed.), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/theoretical-terms-science/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caudill, William A. 1958. The Psychiatric Hospital as a Small Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doerer, Sharon C., Webster, Murray Jr., and Lisa Slattery, Walker. 2017. “Racial Double Standards and Applicant Selection.” Social Science Research 66: 32–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feller, Traci 2010. “What the Literature Tells Us about The Jury Foreperson.” The Jury Expert 22(6): 42–51.Google Scholar
Lotan, Rachel A. 2022. “Equitable Classrooms: A Compelling Connection between Theory and Practice,” pp. 178–199 in Unequals: The Power of Status and Expectations in Our Social Lives, edited by Webster, Murray, Jr, . and Slattery Walker., Lisa New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgeway, Cecilia L. 2019. Status: Why Is It Everywhere? Why Does It Matter? New York: Russell Sage Foundation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuchtman-Yaar, Ephraim and Semyonov, Moshe. 1979. “Ethnic Inequality in Israeli Schools and Sports: An Expectation States Approach.” The American Journal of Sociology 85(3): 576–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Further Reading
Bales, R. Freed. 1950. “A Set of Categories for the Analysis of Small Group Interaction.” American Sociological Review 15(2): 257–163. www.jstor.org/stable/2086790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Joseph. 2014. “The Standardized Experimental Situation in Expectation States Research: Notes on History, Uses, and Special Features,” pp. 269–293 in Laboratory Experiments in the Social Sciences (2nd ed.), edited by Webster, Murray, Jr, . and Sell, Jane. Boston: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Joseph, Cohen, Bernard P, and Zelditch, Morris, 1972. “Status Characteristics and Social Interaction.” American Sociological Review 37(3): 241–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, Joseph, Hamit Fisek, M, Norman, Robert Z, and Zelditch, Morris, Jr. 1977. Status Characteristics and Social Interaction: An Expectation States Approach. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Berger, Joseph and Webster, Murray, Jr. 2022. “Anatomy of the Expectation States Research Program,” pp. 36–69 in Unequals: The Power of Status and Expectations in Our Social Lives, edited by Webster, Murray, Jr. and Slattery Walker, Lisa. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foschi, Martha. 2000. “Double Standards for Competence: Theory and Research.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foschi, Martha and Valenzuela, Jerilee. 2015. “Choosing between Two Semi-finalists: On Academic Performance Gap, Sex Category, and Decision Questions.” Social Science Research 54: 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, Paul and Berger, Joseph, 1981. “Theoretical Consequences of the Status Characteristics Formulation.” American Journal of Sociology 86(5): 953–983. www.jstor.org/stable/2778744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ridgeway, Cecilia L. 2014. “Why Status Matters for Inequality.” American Sociological Review 79(1): 1–16. 10.1177/0003122413515997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, I. Richard and Webster, Jr. Murray 1972. “Source of Evaluations Reformulated and Analyzed,” pp. 317–327 in The Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Vol. IV, edited by Le Cam, L. M., Neyman, J., and Scott, E. L.. Berkeley, CA: The University of California Press.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range
of users and attains the highest
(AAA)
level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive
accessibility guidelines.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.