Content area
Full text
In task-oriented groups, people accept influence more from others whom they believe, on the basis of diffuse and specific status characteristics as well as prior performances, to have greater ability at the task. Past research has treated difference in ability as a binary variable (better or worse); it is not known whether magnitude of difference in performances translates into relative magnitude of inferred ability, and thence into degrees of differentiation in the status structure of decision-making groups. We conducted an experiment to examine the relative impact of three aspects of task performance on the inference of ability: absolute level of performance, relative performance (better/worse), and the degree of difference in performances by two group members. These variables then were used to predict acceptance of influence in a two-person decision task. Simple binary difference in ability explained 35 per cent of the variance in influence accepted. Degree of difference in ability significantly increased level of prediction, particularly for subjects in the lower range of performance scores, thus supporting the claim that relative and absolute levels of performance create additional differences in expectations. Finally, we propose that a concept of "graded status characteristics" should be incorporated into status characteristics theory.
Differences in perceived competence underlie differences in power and prestige in informal, task-oriented groups. Berger and his associates (Balkwell, 199la; Berger, Fisek et al. 1977; Berger, Rosenholtz and Zelditch 1980; Berger and Zelditch 1985) have provided a formal theory to explain how participants in such groups use status information to form expectations for relative task competence for self and for other, and how these beliefs in turn determine the subsequent patterns of interaction, evaluation, and influence in groups. Driskell and Mullen's (1990) meta-analysis of research related to the theory of status characteristics and expectation states (abbreviated here as SCT) found strong support for the central claim of the theory, namely that status organizes interaction through the formation of differential performance expectations.
Starting from a relatively small and simple base of assumptions, SCT has succeeded in predicting a wide range of status-related phenomena including nonverbal communication (Berger, Webster, et al. 1986; Dovidio et al. 1988; Ridgeway, Berger, and Smith, 1985), evaluation of ability by experts (Foddy 1988; Webster and Sobieszek 1974), classroom participation (Cohen 1982) and equity...