Attention-structure and behavior in G/wi San children

Hold, Barbara

doi:10.1016/0162-3095(80)90013-8

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Hawley (2002Hawley ( , 2003 found that among children aged 3-6, narrow coercive behaviors such as taking away a toy, insulting, or physically aggressing against another child were as likely to promote control over a desired toy as were narrow prosocial behaviors such as making suggestions and offering help. Other developmental studies have found that children who are more frequently imitated, obeyed, and preferred as interaction partners, as well as children who frequently win agonistic encounters, tend to receive the most looks or glances from their peers (Abramovitch, 1976;La Freniere & Charlesworth, 1983;Hold, 1976;Vaughn & Waters, 1981). Similarly, teacher-rated aggressiveness, observed Dominant acts, peer liking, and the degree to which a child is imitated have all been found to predict the number of glances received from other children (Abramovitch & Grusec, 1978;La Freniere & Charlesworth, 1983; but see Vaughn & Waters, 1981).…”

Section: Preliminary Evidence On the Association Between Dominance Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, in accordance with prior research, we operationalized social rank in terms of social influence (i.e., the ability to modify others' behaviors, thoughts, and feelings; Báles, Strodtbeck, Mills, & Roseborough, 1951;Berger et al, 1972;Cartwright, 1959;French & Raven, 1959;Henrich & Gil-White, 2001;Magee & Galinsky, 2008;Mazur, 1973;Moore, 1968) and attention received from others (Anderson & Shirako, 2008;Chance, 1967;Fiske, 1993;Hold, 1976;see Anderson, John, Keltner, & Kring, 2001), and predicted that each of two distinct rank-ascending strategiesDominance and Prestige-would be associated with rank attainment.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence.

Cheng

Tracy

Foulsham

et al. 2013

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

845

1,095

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pursuit of social rank is a recurrent and pervasive challenge faced by individuals in all human societies. Yet, the precise means through which individuals compete for social standing remains unclear. In 2 studies, we investigated the impact of 2 fundamental strategies-Dominance (the use of force and intimidation to induce fear) and Prestige (the sharing of expertise or know-how to gain respect)-on the attainment of social rank, which we conceptualized as the acquisition of (a) perceived influence over others (Study 1), (b) actual influence over others' behaviors (Study 1), and (c) others' visual attention (Study 2). Study 1 examined the process of hierarchy formation among a group of previously unacquainted individuals, who provided round-robin judgments of each other after completing a group task. Results indicated that the adoption of either a Dominance or Prestige strategy promoted perceptions of greater influence, by both group members and outside observers, and higher levels of actual influence, based on a behavioral measure. These effects were not driven by popularity; in fact, those who adopted a Prestige strategy were viewed as likable, whereas those who adopted a Dominance strategy were not well liked. In Study 2, participants viewed brief video clips of group interactions from Study 1 while their gaze was monitored with an eye tracker. Dominant and Prestigious targets each received greater visual attention than targets low on either dimension. Together, these findings demonstrate that Dominance and Prestige are distinct yet viable strategies for ascending the social hierarchy, consistent with evolutionary theory.

show abstract

Section: Preliminary Evidence On the Association Between Dominance Pmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence.

Cheng

Tracy

Foulsham

et al. 2013

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

845

1,095

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Determining which students are often the center of attention can be used to find out a social hierarchy within a group of children (Hold, 1980). We measured how present the students are in their peers' mind via peer-nomination.…”

Section: Measurement Of Social Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting in Touch – Social status predicts physical interaction in classrooms

Eder¹,

Oberzaucher²

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social interactions and hierarchical structures in classrooms are studied in a number of scientific disciplines, yet the complexity of such systems makes them hard to investigate. In the present study we explore the relationship between social status and bodily interaction, since non-verbal communication and touch play a role in most social systems, yet are poorly understood in school settings.We developed a novel approach to assess social status in grammar school students by way of measuring the presence in others' minds: Classmates assessed their peers in intellectual, social and physical domains. Additionally, we measured the amount and nature of physical interactions among classmates during breaks in the classroom. These interactions were tracked with the help of older, trained and regularly supervised students from the same school. This peer-to-peer method generated large amounts of data over a period of two months, during which 168 students were observed repeatedly.Results show that touching behavior is modulated by social status and sex: The amount of physical interaction with classmates increases significantly with social status. Same sex touching of intimate zones such as breasts, lap and buttocks occur more frequently among individuals of similar status as compared to touching the intimate zones of the opposite sex. The latter involves extremely high and low ranked individuals more often than same-sex interactions.This study helps to understand formative interactions within classrooms and gives rise to new questions on the establishment and maintenance of hierarchies in peer groups.

show abstract

“…Chance and his colleagues developed a second approach to dominance based on "attention structure" (Chance, 1967;Chance & Jolly, 1970;Chance & Larsen, 1976), indexed by the amount of visual regard individuals within a group show each other. Hold (1976) found it possible to reliably rank preschool children in this way, and a number of behaviors thought to be attributable to dominance status were correlated with this hierarchy. However, Vaughn and Waters (1981) found only a modest correlation between such an attention-structure ranking and a dominance hierarchy based on outcomes of observed ago-nistic behavior, and behavioral correlates of attention rank were found to be very difFerent from those of the dominance hierarchy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Affective Bias in Children's Perceptions of Dominance Relationships

Boulton

Smith

1990

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated children's perceptions of the relative strength of themselves and their peers, in 2 classes of 8-year-olds and 2 classes of 11-year-olds. Each child ranked his or her entire class in terms of strength and liking. Previous investigators have assumed that such strength perceptions reflect the dominance structure of the group. The present results, replicating previous findings, indicate that children consistently overestimate their place in this hierarchy in relation to their peers' perceptions. In addition, it was found that bias in perceptions of strength extended in a systematic way to the peer group, with liked peers being overranked and disliked peers being underranked. For most children, this result could be explained in terms of an enhanced evaluation of liked, but not disliked, peers, or in terms of liked, but not disliked, peers being perceived as similar to themselves. The theoretical and methodological implications of these results for the concept of dominance in children's groups are discussed.

show abstract

Attention-structure and behavior in G/wi San children

Cited by 17 publications

References 9 publications

Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence.

Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence.

Getting in Touch – Social status predicts physical interaction in classrooms

Affective Bias in Children's Perceptions of Dominance Relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About