Lower‐Status Participation and Influence:Task Structure Matters

Abstract

Status hierarchies readily form in groups and, once established, limit lower-status group members' opportunities for contributing to and influencing group decisions. Recent findings, however, suggest that the type of task on which a group works may allow lower-status individuals to break through power and prestige orders in a cooperative way while conflicting with ideas of their higher-status group members. In this article, we review a research program that investigates how task structure relates to status and influence in small groups. In one experiment, using groups of three female students as participants, we found that open-structured tasks allow lower-status group members to participate, receive positive evaluations, and improve their status more than closed-structured tasks. In a second experiment, using groups of two female students and a female experimenter as participants, we found that open-structured tasks and lower-status confederates foster more divergent thinking and indirect influence than closed-structured tasks and higherstatus sources. Our findings contribute to the understanding of how immediate problem-solving environments contribute to status change and influence in small groups.

Cooperation and Conflict within Groups: Bridging Intragroup and Intergroup Processes

“…Yet differentiation of roles within groups is almost inevitably associated with hierarchical structure of that group as a whole. As Alexander, Chizhik, Chizhik, and Goodman (this volume) observed in their article in this volume, “Early on in the formation of groups, hierarchies of power and prestige become readily apparent. Such inequalities develop even in groups where members are of equal status at the outset of group interaction” (pp.…”

When and why hierarchy steepness is related to team performance

“…Clear guidelines from just a few high-status members may then reduce the uncertainties that such tasks entail (see Fein, 2012). But, because the remaining members are then prohibited to demonstrate task knowledge (see Moreland, Argote, & Krishnan, 1996), steeper hierarchies may also obstruct the integration of different task perspectives that is required for the execution of complex tasks (Alexander, Chizhik, Chizhik, & Goodman, 2009;Greer et al, 2014). Consequently, our next hypothesis is:…”

Cooperative learning instructional methods for CS1

“…When groups work on tasks that can be solved in multiple ways, there are more opportunities for all students to contribute to their group's problem solving. This can lead to more equitable participation by minority students [Alexander et al 2009;Chizhik 2001;Chizhik et al 2003]. In addition, the problem-solving process becomes more supportive and less competitive.…”