David G. Wagner

Gender and Interpersonal Task Behaviors: Status Expectation Accounts

In this paper we argue for the utility of status characteristics theory (Berger et al. 1977) in accounting for research concerned with gender differences in interpersonal task situations. We state and defend a basic status argument that differences in stereotypical gender task behaviors are a direct function of status differences or of attempts to cope with status differences. We show support for this argument in several areas of research: the influence, participation and performer evaluations of group members; their relative performance-reactor profiles; the relation of these behavioral profiles to the assignment of personality traits; the correlation of status position with the gender typing of tasks (i.e., male-identified, female-identified, or neutral); the relationship between gender status and salient information about other statuses; the role of expectations for rewards; and the emergence of mechanisms for coping with the implication of a low gender status position. We conclude that status characteristics theory can provide a set of interrelated explanations of the relationship of gender to interpersonal task behaviors.

Do Sociological Theories Grow

Although many observers assume that theoretical progress in sociology has been minimal, there in fact has been considerable growth. Most of the evidence, however, is hidden because sociologists generally (1) fail to differentiate kinds of theoretical activity, (2) focus almost exclusively on growth by means of increasing empirical support, and (3) ignore the variety of theoretical contexts within which growth can occur. Distinguishing among orienting strategies (i.e., metatheoretical frameworks), unit theories (individual theoretical arguments), and theoretical research programs (sets of interrelated theories) helps overcome these obstacles. A focus on programs reveals five types of relations among theories. Three types represent basic forms of theoretical growth; the other two are more specialized forms which usually emerge only in the context of programs based on one of the three basic types. These ideas are first explicated and then applied to several cases of ongoing theoretical activity in sociology. Such cases provide models or exemplars (in the Kuhnian sense) of theoretical growth. Detailed analysis of these exemplars should promote significant growth in other branches of sociology.

Can Gender Inequalities be Reduced

Research demonstrates that sex or gender remains a powerful basis of inequality in the expectations and behavior of men and women in mixed-sex task groups. Drawing upon the work of Epstein (1970) and the theoretical apparatus of status characteristics theory (see Berger et al., 1977), we explore one means by which these inequalities may be reduced--the disconfirmation of established gender-based expectations. The results of two experiments-one involving females and one involving males-show that disconfirmation does in fact reduce task inequality for both women and men. The results also support predictions based on the combining and attenuation principles of status characteristics theory. We interpret these findings as demonstrating that sex role socialization is (1) a manifestation of a more general status organizing process and (2) more situationally specific than has previously been assumed.

The growth of sociological theories

Introduction What is a Theory? Theoretical Context Theoretical Context and Theory Growth Theoretical Research Programs The Social Context of Theory Growth Toward A Theory of Theory Growth Conclusions

Expectation States Theory: Growth, Opportunities and Challenges

Abstract Purpose We survey and organize over fifty years of theoretical research on status and expectation state processes. After defining some key terms in this theoretical approach, we briefly describe theories and branches in the program. Methodology/Approach We also focus on a few theories that illustrate distinct patterns of theory growth, using them to show the variety of ways in which the research program has grown. Findings The program structure developed from a single set of theories on development and maintenance of group inequality in the 1960s to six interrelated branches by 1988. Between 1988 and today, the overall structure has grown to total 19 different branches. We briefly describe each branch, identifying over 200 resources for the further study of these branches. Research Implications Although the various branches share key concepts and processes, they have been developed by different researchers, in a variety of settings from laboratories to schools to business organizations. Second, we outline some important issues for further research in some of the branches. Third, we emphasize the value of developing new research methods for testing and applying the theories. Practical Implications These theories have been used to explain phenomena of gender, racial, and ethnic inequality among others, and for understanding some cases of personality attributions, deviance and control processes, and application of double standards in hiring. Social Implications Status and expectation state processes often operate to produce invidious social inequalities. Understanding these processes can enable social scientists to devise more effective interventions to reduce these inequalities. Originality/Value of the Chapter Status and expectation state processes occupy a significant segment of research into group processes. This chapter provides an authoritative overview of ideas in the program, what is known, and what remains to be discovered.

Programs, Theory, and Metatheory

By differentiating metatheory from theory proper, the authors may succeed in making a plausible case for a scientific sociology, but at the cost of its intellectual emasculation. Sociological theory cannot be reduced to a series of axioms, propositions, or causal models. Sociological explanation is embedded in a conceptual scheme that maps out an object domain and a scientific project. A conceptual scheme embodies a series of assumptions and claims about the social world, knowledge of it, and the relation between the two. Theory is precisely that complex discourse that sets out such conceptual schemes, specifies the range of assumptions and claims advanced in a conceptual schemes, argues over standards in terms of which these claims are to be assessed, and incorporates a conceptual scheme into sociological explanations. To sacrifice this rich discourse in the name of a scientific idol is an unfortunate lapse of reason, a shortcircuiting of an intellectually and morally vital process of argumentation that is the core of science.

On the Irrationality of Rejecting Falsified Theories

Abstract Social scientists have traditionally assumed that the only appropriate response to the falsification of a theory is to reject it. That we do not suggests that the behavior of social scientists is irrational (or at least nonrational). This assumption is a mistake based on an overly simplistic view of what a theory is and what is involved in a test of a theory. Theories are in fact very complex intellectual constructions, involving concepts, definitions, statements of contingent relation, and statements of scope. Tests of theories are even more complex, involving instantiations of concepts in both substantive statements and scope statements, hypotheses, and observation statements. Falsification indicates a problem is present somewhere in that intellectual structure. The appropriate response in such situations is to revise the theory (or the test of theory), not to scrap the theory altogether. The process of revision and retesting may continue indefinitely. There is no specifiable point at which it becomes more rational to reject the theory than to continue modifying it.

Chaos in Social Theory: Explaining Complex Events with Simple Ideas

Abstract Sociological theorists have expressed dissatisfaction with traditional models of explanation in recent years. Critics have attacked the dichotomy between macro and micro explanations, the use of linear statistical models, and the separation of structure from process. Sociological theory has not developed alternatives to traditional approaches that are widely accepted. We examine one solution to these problems and show how it applies to issues in studies of social organization and social process. We review major approaches to explaining social phenomena. In this review we identify key links between traditions and suggest how these ties affect development of theories. We restrict our review to models of social structure and behavior embedded in these structures. We adapt ideas from chaos theory to show how to explain social phenomena with simple ideas about how current behavior depends on history. Physicists and biologists have adopted chaos theory to explain how determinant patterns of events sudd...

Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status.

Is it better to be a big frog in a small pond or a small frog in a big pond? In this lively and original book, the author argues persuasively that peoples concerns about status permeate and profoundly alter a broad range of human behaviour. He takes issue with his fellow economists for too often neglecting fundamental elements in human nature in their study of how people make basic economic choices.