Status: Insights from Organizational Sociology

Sauder, Michael; Lynn, Freda B.; Podolny, Joel M.

doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071811-145503

Cited by 336 publications

(300 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

274

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have increasingly sought to understand the relationship between actors' reputations and status (e.g., Chandler, Haunschild, Rhee, & Beckman, 2013;Ertug & Castellucci, 2013;Jensen & Roy, 2008;Pollock, Lee, Jin, & Lashley, forthcoming;Sorenson, 2014;Stern et al, 2014). The emerging consensus in this research is that although both reputation and status signal unobserved qualities, they differ because reputation is based on prior accomplishments and behavior, whereas status is based on an actor's position in a social hierarchy that both reflects and influences how the actor is acknowledged by others (Sauder, Lynn, & Podolny, 2012).…”

Section: Audience-specific Reputations In the Contemporary Art Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Art of Representation: How Audience-specific Reputations Affect Success in the Contemporary Art Field

Ertug

Yogev

Lee

et al. 2016

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AcknowledgmentWe would like to thank Tim Pollock and the three anonymous reviewers for their excellent suggestions and guidance. We would also like to thank Martin Gargiulo, Matteo Prato, Heeyon Kim, Abhijith G. Acharya, Fabrizio Castellucci, Yi Tang, and Francois Collet for their valuable feedback, as well as participants at presentations at the Oxford University Centre for Corporate Reputation and at Singapore Management University. We would also like to express our gratitude for the financial support we have received from the Oxford University Centre for Corporate Reputation. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research 2 THE ART OF REPRESENTATION: HOW AUDIENCE-SPECIFIC REPUTATIONS AFFECT SUCCESS IN THE CONTEMPORARY ART FIELD ABSTRACTWe study the effects of actors' audience-specific reputations on their levels of success with different audiences in the same field. Extending recent work that has emphasized the presence of multiple audiences with different concerns, we demonstrate that considering audience specificity leads to an improved understanding of reputation effects. Using data on emerging artists in the field of contemporary art from 2001 to 2010, we investigate the manner in which artists' audience-specific reputations affect their subsequent success with two distinct audiences: museums and galleries. Our findings suggest that audience-specific reputations have systematically different effects with respect to success with museums and galleries. Our findings also illuminate the extent to which audience-specific reputations are relevant for emerging research on the contingent effects of reputation. In particular, our findings support our predictions that audiences differ from one another in terms of the extent to which other signals (specifically, status and interaction with other audiences) enhance or reduce the value of audience-specific reputations. Our study thus advances theory by providing empirical evidence for the value of incorporating audience-specific reputations into the general study of reputation.3

show abstract

Section: Audience-specific Reputations In the Contemporary Art Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Art of Representation: How Audience-specific Reputations Affect Success in the Contemporary Art Field

Ertug

Yogev

Lee

et al. 2016

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under such conditions of uncertainty, it is often reasonable for decision-makers to infer quality from popularity (e.g., they reason that more popular songs are likely to be better, or that high-status actors are more likely to deliver services of higher quality [see Gould 2002;Lynn et al 2009;Sauder et al, 2012); 5 and insofar as the differences in quality are negligible, this implies that random, early leads in popularity can eventuate in large differences over time. Moreover, since different songs are lucky at the outset of each alternative "world" that is simulated, each trial produces different winners and losers.…”

Section: Three Studies On Construction Concentration and Fashiomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And there is also a wide variety of valuation entrepreneurship that pertains to standards and metrics of performance (Espeland and Sauder 2007;Sauder et al, 2012;Timmermans and Epstein 2010). In all such cases, the entrepreneur has a dissenting view from the prevailing valuation and he appeals to objective conditions in a bid to change the prevailing valuation.…”

Section: Contrarianism Ii: Objective Constraint From Valuation Entrepmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construction, Concentration, and (Dis)Continuities in Social Valuations

Zuckerman¹

2012

Annu. Rev. Sociol.

137

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I review and integrate recent sociological research that makes progress on three interrelated puzzles of social valuation: (a) the degree of social construction relative to objective constraints; (b) the degree of concentration in social valuations at a single point in time; and (c) the conditions that govern two broad forms of temporal discontinuity--(i): fashion cycles, especially in cultural expression and in managerial practices; and (ii) bubble/crash dynamics, as witnessed in such domains as authoritarian regimes and financial markets. In the course of the review, I argue for the importance of identifying how objective conditions constrain social construction, and suggest two contrarian mechanisms by which this is accomplished-arbitrage and valuation entrepreneurship, and the conditions under which they are more or less effective.

show abstract

“…2 Social scientists have long understood status to be an indicator of hierarchical position and prestige that helps individuals and organizations procure resources and opportunities for advancement (e.g., Whyte 1943;Podolny 2001;Sauder, Lynn, and Podolny 2012). Status markers, like ranking systems in education (Espeland and Sauder 2007) or awards and prizes (Rossman et al 2010), accentuate quality differences among actors and create greater socio-economic inequality.…”

Section: Forthcoming In Management Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing Stars: Matthew Effects and Status Bias in Major League Baseball Umpiring

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper tests the assumption that evaluators are biased to positively evaluate high status individuals, irrespective of quality. Using unique data from Major League Baseball umpires' evaluation of pitch quality, which allow us to observe the difference in a pitch's objective quality and in its perceived quality as judged by the umpire, we show that umpires are more likely to over-recognize quality by expanding the strike zone, and less likely to under-recognize quality by missing pitches in the strike zone for high status pitchers. Ambiguity and the pitcher's reputation as a "control pitcher" moderate the effect of status on umpire judgment. Further, we show that umpire errors resulting from status bias lead to actual performance differences for the pitcher and team.Keywords: Status, Bias, Performance Forthcoming in Management Science2 Social scientists have long understood status to be an indicator of hierarchical position and prestige that helps individuals and organizations procure resources and opportunities for advancement (e.g., Whyte 1943;Podolny 2001;Sauder, Lynn, and Podolny 2012). Status markers, like ranking systems in education (Espeland and Sauder 2007) or awards and prizes (Rossman et al. 2010), accentuate quality differences among actors and create greater socio-economic inequality. Past research has advanced our understanding of how status hierarchies emerge and persist (Berger, Rosenholtz, and Zelditch 1980;Webster and Hysom 1998;Ridgeway and Correll 2006), on the psychological rewards of status attainment (e.g., Willer 2009;Anderson et al. 2012), on the association of status with characteristics such as race and gender (Ridgeway 1991), or on status outcomes, such as the accumulation of power, price and wage differentials, and other economic and social benefits (Podolny 1993;Benjamin and Podolny 1999;Thye 2000;Correll et al. 2007;Stuart, Hoang, and Hybels 1999;Bothner, Kim, and Smith 2011;Pearce 2011;Waguespack and Sorenson, 2011).In economic sociology, the classic statement of self-reproducing advantages is Robert Merton's (1968) theory of the Matthew Effect. Underlying the Matthew Effect is an assumption that individuals are biased to positively evaluate high status individuals irrespective of quality, and that this bias, rather than actual quality differences, perpetuates inequality between high status and low status actors. Scholars in status characteristics theory have made the case that this bias results from individuals' expectations and prior beliefs about competence and quality (Anderson et al. 2001;Ridgeway and Correll 2006;Berger et al. 1977;Ridgeway and Berger 1986), and experimental and audit studies have identified status characteristics as a mechanism that underlies discriminatory evaluations of low status individuals (e.g., Correll et al. 2007).Despite the evidence emanating from the experimental research in status characteristics studies, scholars studying the Matthew Effect in real world settings have had a more difficult time demonstrating that status bias is a mech...

show abstract

Status: Insights from Organizational Sociology

Cited by 336 publications

References 79 publications

The Art of Representation: How Audience-specific Reputations Affect Success in the Contemporary Art Field

The Art of Representation: How Audience-specific Reputations Affect Success in the Contemporary Art Field

Construction, Concentration, and (Dis)Continuities in Social Valuations

Seeing Stars: Matthew Effects and Status Bias in Major League Baseball Umpiring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About