Fear and loving in social hierarchy: Sex differences in preferences for power versus status

Hays, Nicholas A.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.08.007

Cited by 69 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Directly consistent with the argument that status leads to an outward orientation, Hays (2013) associated the preference for status with characteristics such as high need for affiliation and high interdependence, traits more commonly found among women (who corresponding with the results of Fragale et al (2011), are typically seen as having more warmth). Likewise, also directly consistent with our reasoning that power differs from status insofar as it prompts more of an inward (i.e., self-focused) orientation, Hays (2013) found that preferences for power are associated with characteristically male traits of high need for power and high independence. These findings show that the power and status differences of our focus emerge not only when people find themselves in either a highly ranked power or status position but that they also emerge with regard to the desire for power or status.…”

Section: Differential Preferences For Status and Powersupporting

confidence: 68%

“…A key example of such work is that by Hays (2013), who considered the role of gender in shaping the extent to which power versus status is desired and sought. Hays (2013) hypothesized that given gender differences in the need for power, affiliation, independence, and interdependence, men will desire power more than women. In contrast, women will desire status more than men.…”

Section: Differential Preferences For Status and Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What’s in a Name? Status, Power, and Other Forms of Social Hierarchy

Blader

Chen

2014

The Psychology of Social Status

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is an exciting time to be a researcher with a "social status" focus. Indeed, this book serves as a testament to the energy that currently surrounds the topic of social status (hereafter referred to simply as "status"). There is an enormous amount of activity on the topic, with much of the most recent and innovative work coming from psychology researchers. These recent developments are rather intriguing in light of the fact that status is, by no means, a new topic. Discussions about status have quite a long history within the social sciences (particularly in anthropology and sociology), consistent with the reality that status hierarchies emerge in all social settings and that status issues permeate social life (e.g., Anderson and Kilduff 2009;Blader and Chen 2012;Fiske 2010;Podolny 2005). Given these realities, why have psychology researchers not historically paid more attention to status, and, moreover, why have related research areas such as organizational behavior and management not paid more attention to this truly fundamental issue?One possible factor might be cultural-some norms in the US, as well as in most Western countries, tend to proscribe the notion that individuals should (or even can) be rank-ordered on perceived levels of esteem and worthiness. Instead, norms maintain that everyone is unique and worthy-even if only in their own "special" way (Brewer and Chen 2007). This perspective is reflected in emerging work that shows the stigma attached to status striving (Kim and Pettit 2013). Another factor contributing to the lack of attention to status may be the interest in other hierarchical dimensions-power, in particular. That is, research has tended to focus on alternate ways of thinking about rank and hierarchy. Of course, it may well be that the flurry of work on the psychology of power has sparked recent interest in related concepts, and status research may be a beneficiary of that trend.A third likely contributing factor-one that serves as a critical basis for this chapter-is that there has historically been relatively weak conceptual clarity around

show abstract

Section: Differential Preferences For Status and Powersupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Differential Preferences For Status and Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

What’s in a Name? Status, Power, and Other Forms of Social Hierarchy

Blader

Chen

2014

The Psychology of Social Status

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Status, which is also referred to as prestige, can be defined as social standing that is granted to individuals for superior skills, success, or knowledge (18). Power is defined as asymmetrical control over resources and tends to be positively correlated with status in realworld hierarchies (36,37). In line with other experimental designs (20)(21)(22), our manipulation therefore included features of social status and power to emulate real-world hierarchies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hierarchy stability moderates the effect of status on stress and performance in humans

Knight

Mehta

2016

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High social status reduces stress responses in numerous species, but the stress-buffering effect of status may dissipate or even reverse during times of hierarchical instability. In an experimental test of this hypothesis, 118 participants (57.3% female) were randomly assigned to a high-or low-status position in a stable or unstable hierarchy and were then exposed to a social-evaluative stressor (a mock job interview). High status in a stable hierarchy buffered stress responses and improved interview performance, but high status in an unstable hierarchy boosted stress responses and did not lead to better performance. This general pattern of effects was observed across endocrine (cortisol and testosterone), psychological (feeling in control), and behavioral (competence, dominance, and warmth) responses to the stressor. The joint influence of status and hierarchy stability on interview performance was explained by feelings of control and testosterone reactivity. Greater feelings of control predicted enhanced interview performance, whereas increased testosterone reactivity predicted worse performance. These results provide direct causal evidence that high status confers adaptive benefits for stress reduction and performance only when the social hierarchy is stable. When the hierarchy is unstable, high status actually exacerbates stress responses.status | stress | performance | testosterone | cortisol

show abstract

“…One is gender. Women are generally inclined, overall, to be more other-oriented than men, tending to be less likely to construe themselves as independent (Cross & Madson, 1997) and desiring status (positive social evaluations) more than power (Hays, 2013; see also Mason, Zhang, & Dyer, 2010;Offerman & Schrier, 1985). Research also suggests that women may be more attuned to the moral and social implications of their behaviors (Kennedy & Kray, 2014).…”

Section: The Link Between the Sense Of Power And The Sense Of Responsmentioning

confidence: 99%

When, why, and how do powerholders “feel the power”? Examining the links between structural and psychological power and reviving the connection between power and responsibility

Tost

2015

Research in Organizational Behavior

141

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fear and loving in social hierarchy: Sex differences in preferences for power versus status

Cited by 69 publications

References 50 publications

What’s in a Name? Status, Power, and Other Forms of Social Hierarchy

What’s in a Name? Status, Power, and Other Forms of Social Hierarchy

Hierarchy stability moderates the effect of status on stress and performance in humans

When, why, and how do powerholders “feel the power”? Examining the links between structural and psychological power and reviving the connection between power and responsibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About