The Consequences of Objective and Subjective Status Inconsistency

Abstract

The phenomenon of status inconsisitency, while having rich potential as an explanatory variable, has been beset with methodological problems and conflicting findings. Nelson has argued that the use of objective and subjective components of status inconsistency will allow for a more accurate test of its usefulness (1973). The present study, using a sample of 1971 male college graduates interviewed in 1974, analyzed the attitudinal and behavioral consequences of one type of status inconsistency (under‐rewarded) incorporating objective and subjective techniques. The tentative conclusions were: (1) the use of subjective measures of inconsistency validates this phenomenon as an explanatory variable; (2) the use of subjective measures minimizes the methodological criticisms of the objective approach; and (3) both objective and subjective measures of status inconsistency should be incorporated in future research.

Intergenerational Social Mobility and Popular Explanations of Poverty: A Comparative Perspective

“…This is well aligned with an observation made by Lipset (1992) that subjective feelings about mobility are more important for political attitudes than objective intergenerational upgrade of occupational status. The same findings have been reported in the earlier literature on status inconsistency (Baer, Eitzen, Duprey, Thompson, & Cole, 1976). Psychological explanations of this tendency are that individuals tend to filter their objective environment in order to derive their subjective perceptions of the world and their own experiences (Wolf, 1978).…”

Almost All You Wanted to Know About Status Inconsistency but Never Dared to Measure: Theoretical Deficits in Empirical Research on Status Inconsistency

“…also Starnes & Singleton 1977), contrary to an earlier finding of Baer et al (1976) which they criticize, the measurement of status inconsistency as felt by the respective individual ("subjective status inconsistency") is a necessary requirement if any progress in status inconsistency research is to be achieved at all. One of the measures of subjective status inconsistency, however, employed by Blocker and Riedesel is of a dubious nature since it asks for evaluating a state on a variable which for almost everyone easily acquires the characteristic of a nonsatiable want.…”

The Nonconsequences of Objective and Subjective Status Inconsistency: Requiem for a Moribund Concept

“…Nelson (1973) specifies the two should logically coincide only when the individual shares normative expectations regarding status variables. Baer et al (1976) found a strong relationship, but their sample allows little generalization. The relationship must be spelled out if subjective SI is to be added to our conceptual repertoire.…”

“…The question remains whether or not "objective" states of SI are associated with subjective feelings of inconsistency, as does the question of the relative predictive power of each type. Recent research by Baer et al (1976) concludes subjective measures of SI succeed in validating SI as an explanatory variable.…”

“…The theoretical importance of SI lies in its ability, if any, to predict changes in dependent variables above and beyond the effects of single status variables-changes due to the interaction effects of a combination of status variables. The design of Baer et al (1976) obviously does not allow this necessary control.…”