Advances in Group Processes

Shane R. Thye, Edward J. Lawler

• Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781787434394
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Social Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Advances in Group Processes publishes theoretical analyses, reviews and theory-based empirical chapters on group phenomena. The series adopts a broad conception of "group processes." This includes work on groups ranging from the very small to the very large, and on classic and contemporary topics such as status, power, trust, justice, social influence, identity, decision-making, intergroup relations and social networks. Previous contributors have included scholars from diverse fields including sociology, psychology, political science, economics, business, philosophy, mathematics and organizational behavior.
Volume 34 brings together papers that address theoretical and empirical issues related to the spread of status value, reward expectations theory, age and gender effects, and measuring the impact of status manipulations. Other contributions examine cognitive orientation, perspective taking and empathy, the stability of values, and group perceptions during computer-mediated communication. Overall, the volume includes papers that reflect a wide range of theoretical approaches from leading scholars who work in group processes.

ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF STATUS INFORMATION CONVEYANCE ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF NEGATIVE REWARDS: A PRELIMINARY TEST AND MODEL

Lisa M. Dilks, Tucker S. McGrimmon and Shane R. Thye

ABSTRACT

Purpose – To determine the role of status information conveyance in a negative reward allocation setting.

Methodology – Using previously published experimental data, we test the relative effects of status information conveyed by expressive and indicative status cues on the allocation of a negative reward. Further, we construct an alternative graph theoretic model of expectation advantage which is also tested to determine its model fit relative to the classic model of Reward Expectations Theory.

Findings – Results provide strong support for the conclusion that status information conveyed by expressive status cues influences reward allocations more than information conveyed by indicative cues. We also find evidence that our alternative graph theoretic model of expectation advantage improves model fit.

Originality – This research is the first to test the relative impact of expressive versus indicative status cues on the allocation of negative rewards and shows that status characteristics can have differential impacts on these allocations contingent on how characteristics are conveyed. Furthermore, the research suggests a graph theoretic model that allows for this differentiation based on information conveyance and provides empirical support for its structure in a negative reward allocation environment.

Research limitations – Future research is required to validate the results in positive reward situations.

Social implications – The results show that an individual’s expectations are altered by varying the manner in which status information is presented, thereby influencing the construction and maintenance of status hierarchies and the inequalities those structures generate. Thus, this research has implications for any group or evaluative task where status processes are relevant.

Keywords: Reward expectations theory; status cues; negative rewards

INTRODUCTION

Social science has repeatedly shown that varying the manner in which information is conveyed influences how individuals think about that information and consequently alters their expectations, decision making, and judgments. For example, the framing literature suggests that presenting equivalent choices and their outcomes as a gain, as opposed to a loss, results in less risk taking (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981). The more recent “nudging” literature suggests that the order in which information is presented will result in different choices. For example, presenting individuals with healthier options before less healthy ones in a cafeteria line will result in healthier eating habits (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008, p. 1). Further, social norms are more influential when the information about them is acquired by observing others compared to simply being told the norm (Krupka & Weber, 2009; Wernera, Sansonea, & Brown, 2008).

Different forms of information also affect the allocation of positive and negative social rewards, such as vacations and prison sentences, by third parties (Leventhal, 1976). For example, Baker (1974) finds that information regarding the equity or lack thereof between two individuals causes a third-party allocator to reduce the inequity by allocating more rewards to the disadvantaged individual. Further, Kazemi and Tornblom (2014) find reward allocations diminish as the categorization of a reward recipient moves from a member of a group, to a member of a dyad, to a single individual. Finally, when allocators are provided equivalent information but the resource allocation problem is framed as “delivering a good” versus “withholding a bad,” the use of non-egalitarian principles (i.e., merit or ability) as a just means to make allocation decisions increases (Gamliel & Peer, 2006).

These results are important for status researchers working in the reward expectations branch of the expectation states paradigm where the allocation of rewards is the phenomenon of interest. Expectations States Theory is a theoretical research program that seeks to explain inequalities that emerge from group hierarchies based on the characteristics of individuals working in collectively oriented task situations (Berger, 1958; Berger & Connor, 1966, 1969). The Reward Expectations Theory (RET) branch of the program argues that these characteristics will also generate inequalities in situations where rewards such as money or medals are to be allocated as part of the collective task or upon completion of one (Fisek & Wagner, 2003).

RET assumes that all salient characteristics that differentiate individuals to produce a hierarchy have equivalent impacts on the allocation of rewards. However, the discussion above suggests that the presentation of relevant information will affect these allocations. To date, RET has neither theoretically nor empirically investigated the impact status information presentation has on allocation decisions. However, the potential effect of altering an individual’s expectations and judgments through the conveyance of status information has been categorized within the expectation states program as “status cues” (Berger, Webster, Ridgeway, & Rosenholtz, 1986; Fisek, Berger, & Norman, 2005). These cues may be indicative – those that label a person as possessing a certain status such as a college diploma or a statement “I am African American” – or expressive – those that are a product of or “expressed” during an interaction like ethnic or regional dialect, speech style, or emotional expressions (Berger, Webster, Ridgeway, & Rosenholtz, 1986, pp. 4–5). Since both types of cues can reveal status information about an individual, they can generate inequalities in group interactions and expectations. Berger et al. (1986) suggest that when expressive and indicative cues provide conflicting information, expressive cues will be weighed more heavily in determining an individual’s status. Empirical tests confirm this assertion (Rashotte & Smith-Lovin, 1997; Walker, Doerer, & Webster, 2014).

In addition to a dearth of research investigating the differential impacts of status information conveyance, RET typically focuses on the allocation of positive rewards. However, several social situations involve the allocation of negative rewards, such as the distribution of sanctions or punishments. By focusing solely on the allocation of positive rewards, current RET research excludes those negative rewards individuals want to avoid (Skinner, 1953). One exception that uses RET to explain the allocation of negative rewards is the research by Dilks, McGrimmon, and Thye (2015).

The Dilks et al. (2015) study investigates the influence of status processes on third-party evaluators tasked with allocating a negative reward. Specifically, research subjects were asked to read a vignette describing a criminal case involving an incident of drunk driving and to allocate a negative reward operationalized as a sentencing recommendation. The vignette includes court testimonies where the status of the offender and victim is varied. Thus, the paper focuses on how the status of the offender relative to the victim influences recommended sentencing and two of its important antecedents, evaluations of an offender’s “dangerousness” and the severity of the crime. Results indicate that status differences strongly influence the antecedents to sentencing decisions but not sentencing decisions directly. Although the paper extends our knowledge regarding the influence of status processes on the allocation of negative rewards, we believe there are further insights that can be gleaned from the study that are of importance to status researchers in general and to those working specifically in the reward expectations branch of Expectation States Theory.

In the Dilks et al. (2015) study, the conveyance of status information is varied. One set of status characteristics is presented in indicative form, while another is presented expressively. In contrast to the original analysis, we select and analyze specific conditions that allow us to contribute to RET in several ways. First, we continue to refine our knowledge of status processes in negative reward allocative settings. Second, the data from these selected experimental conditions allow us to conduct the first test of the relative impacts of differences in the conveyance of status information on negative reward allocations and in a situation where status cues do not conflict. This test permits the determination of which manner of status information conveyance – expressive versus indicative – has a greater effect on reward allocations. Our results show that, contrary to RET, status characteristics can have differential impacts on the allocation of rewards dependent on how status information is presented. Motivated by these results we use the strong and weak cue gestalt literature (Fisek et al., 2005) to develop a modified graph theoretic model of reward expectations when status cues are present. We then compare the predictive ability of expectation advantage under the classical versus our modified cue gestalt model of reward expectations. Using regression analysis, fit statistics, and model selection tests, we show that expectation advantage calculated using our modified model is statistically more predictive of reward allocations.

REWARD EXPECTATIONS THEORY

Expectations States Theory (hereafter EST) is a theoretical research program that seeks to explain the emergence and maintenance of group hierarchies among those working in collectively oriented task situations (Berger, 1958; Berger & Connor, 1966, 1969). In these settings, individuals form various expectations for themselves and others regarding the group task. Once formed, these expectations hierarchically rank group members into a power and prestige order that shapes interaction patterns among the group as they work to complete a collective task. Individuals higher in the power and prestige ordering are given more opportunities to participate, participate more, are more influential, and are evaluated more highly than those at the bottom of the ordering.

To date, EST research has identified three types of expectations that structure power and prestige orderings. Performance expectations are beliefs about the abilities and task competency of oneself and others, while valued status expectations are “anticipations of the status positions to be held by self and others” (Berger & Webster, 2006, p. 269). Relevant to the current research, are reward expectations – “implicit, shared, normative anticipations about who ‘will and ought to’ get what” (Hysom & Fisek, 2011, p. 1269). The RET branch of EST argues that in situations where differential rewards such as money or medals are to be allocated as a part of a collective task or upon completion of one (Fisek & Wagner, 2003), individuals will form reward expectations for themselves and others to determine these distributions (Berger, Fisek, Norman, & Wagner, 1985, 1998). These reward expectations create a power and prestige order that ranks individuals in terms of their “deservedness of rewards.” Those believed to deserve greater rewards are placed at the top of the ordering and those seen as deserving fewer rewards are relegated to the bottom. Reward expectations take on a “moral quality” absent with either performance or valued status expectations by suggesting there is only one right or proper way to distribute certain rewards (Berger et al., 1985, 1998).

Reward expectations are derived from two types of characteristics: diffuse and specific.¹ A diffuse status characteristic (D) is a culturally specific attribute that involves at least two differentially evaluated states wherein (1) one state of D is more highly valued than the other state, (2) to each state of D there corresponds a distinct set of specific expectations, and (3) to each state of D there is also a corresponding set of general expectations (Berger, Fisek, Norman, & Zelditch, 1977). Empirical research finds that educational attainment, race, gender, age, beauty, and occupation operate as diffuse status charact...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• How Status Spreads
• Juvenile Delinquency, Criminal Sentiments, and Self-Sentiments: Exploring a Modified Labeling Theory Proposition
• Assessing the Impact of Status Information Conveyance on the Distribution of Negative Rewards: A Preliminary Test and Model
• The Status Value of Age and Gender: Modeling Combined Effects of Diffuse Status Characteristics
• Measuring the Impact of Status Manipulations Using Monte Carlo Simulations
• Social Structure and Cognitive Orientation
• Self-in-Self, Mind-in-Mind, Heart-in-Heart: The Future of Role-Taking, Perspective Taking, and Empathy
• The Situated Durability of Values
• Perceiving Groups during Computer-Mediated Communication
• Index