scholarly journals Dominance is necessary to explain human status hierarchies - Extended online version and supplemental

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joey T. Cheng ◽  
Jessica Tracy ◽  
Joseph Henrich
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Statistical Problem ◽  
Statistical Analyses ◽  
Online Version ◽  
Extended Version ◽  
Perceived Ability ◽  
Real People ◽  
Perceived Social Status ◽  
Empirical Record

Durkee et al. (2020) conducted a cross-cultural investigation of people’s beliefs about how traits, behaviors, and practices that enhance an individual’s perceived ability to generate benefits (prestige) or inflict costs (dominance) promote perceived social status in humans. In this online extended version of our letter, we identify multicollinearity in the authors’ statistical analyses and explain how this statistical problem renders their results inconclusive as to how benefit-delivery and cost-infliction contribute to status allocation. Moreover, we briefly survey the broader empirical record on actual status relations among real people (rather than people’s beliefs about what leads to status), conducted both in the lab and in naturalistic settings; these studies consistently yield opposite conclusions to Durkee et al. and demonstrate that both prestige and dominance govern human status hierarchies.

scholarly journals Dominance is necessary to explain human status hierarchies [exposition of three concerns]

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joey T. Cheng ◽  
Jessica Tracy ◽  
Joseph Henrich
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Statistical Problem ◽  
Statistical Analyses ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Subjective Beliefs ◽  
Real People ◽  
Perceived Social Status ◽  
Empirical Record

Durkee et al. (2020) conducted a cross-cultural investigation of people’s beliefs about how traits, behaviors, and practices that enhance an individual’s perceived ability to generate benefits (prestige) or inflict costs (dominance) promote perceived social status in humans. In this document, we (a) identify multicollinearity in the authors’ statistical analyses and explain how this statistical problem renders their results inconclusive as to how benefit-delivery and cost-infliction contribute to status allocation; (b) outline flaws in the authors’ operationalization and measures of social status, and discuss how they bias results toward benefit-delivery and underestimate any effect of cost-infliction; and (c) discuss a broader problem with the critical assumption underlying Durkee et al.’s approach: people’s subjective beliefs about what determines status do not serve as sufficient evidence for determining how status asymmetries are actually established in real life. Together, these three major issues severely undermine the authors’ conclusion that there is little evidence for dominance. In closing, we briefly survey the broader empirical record on actual status relations among real people (rather than people’s beliefs about what leads to status), conducted both in the lab and in naturalistic settings; these studies consistently yield opposite conclusions to Durkee et al. and demonstrate that both prestige and dominance govern human status hierarchies.

scholarly journals Dominance is necessary to explain human status hierarchies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joey Cheng ◽  
Jessica Tracy ◽  
Joseph Henrich
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Statistical Problem ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Extended Version ◽  
Subjective Beliefs ◽  
Real People ◽  
Perceived Social Status ◽  
Empirical Record

Durkee et al. (2020) conducted a cross-cultural investigation of people’s beliefs about how traits, behaviors, and practices that enhance an individual’s perceived ability to generate benefits (prestige) or inflict costs (dominance) promote perceived social status in humans. In this letter (also see online extended version), we (a) identify multicollinearity in the authors’ statistical analyses and explain how this statistical problem renders their results inconclusive as to how benefit-delivery and cost-infliction contribute to status allocation; (b) outline flaws in the authors’ operationalization and measures of social status, and discuss how they bias results toward benefit-delivery and underestimate any effect of cost-infliction; and (c) discuss a broader problem with the critical assumption underlying Durkee et al.’s approach: people’s subjective beliefs about what determines status do not serve as sufficient evidence for determining how status asymmetries are actually established in real life. Together, these three major issues severely undermine the authors’ conclusion that there is little evidence for dominance. In closing, we briefly survey the broader empirical record on actual status relations among real people (rather than people’s beliefs about what leads to status), conducted both in the lab and in naturalistic settings; these studies consistently yield opposite conclusions to Durkee et al. and demonstrate that both prestige and dominance govern human status hierarchies.

scholarly journals Dominance is necessary to explain human status hierarchies - Extended online version and supplemental

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joey Cheng ◽  
Jessica Tracy ◽  
Joseph Henrich
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Statistical Problem ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Extended Version ◽  
Subjective Beliefs ◽  
Real People ◽  
Perceived Social Status ◽  
Empirical Record

Durkee et al. (2020) conducted a cross-cultural investigation of people’s beliefs about how traits, behaviors, and practices that enhance an individual’s perceived ability to generate benefits (prestige) or inflict costs (dominance) promote perceived social status in humans. In this online extended version of our letter, we (a) identify multicollinearity in the authors’ statistical analyses and explain how this statistical problem renders their results inconclusive as to how benefit-delivery and cost-infliction contribute to status allocation; (b) outline flaws in the authors’ operationalization and measures of social status, and discuss how they bias results toward benefit-delivery and underestimate any effect of cost-infliction; and (c) discuss a broader problem with the critical assumption underlying Durkee et al.’s approach: people’s subjective beliefs about what determines status do not serve as sufficient evidence for determining how status asymmetries are actually established in real life. Together, these three major issues severely undermine the authors’ conclusion that there is little evidence for dominance. In closing, we briefly survey the broader empirical record on actual status relations among real people (rather than people’s beliefs about what leads to status), conducted both in the lab and in naturalistic settings; these studies consistently yield opposite conclusions to Durkee et al. and demonstrate that both prestige and dominance govern human status hierarchies.

Ethnic Stereotypes in the Central Highlands of Vietnam: Minority Students’ Perspectives

2021 ◽  
pp. 136078042110158
Author(s):  
Trang Thi Thuy Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Minority Students ◽  
Negative Stereotypes ◽  
Ethnic Stereotypes ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Meanings ◽  
Data Source ◽  
Central Highlands ◽  
Perceived Social Status ◽  
Minority People

This study examines ethnic stereotypes toward majority and minority people in the Central Highlands of Vietnam. It contributes a more multidimensional perspective on ethnic stereotypes by exploring minority students’ perspectives on how their ethnic group stereotypes Kinh majority people and how they are being stereotyped by the Kinh. Status and solidarity are used as the theoretical lens to gain insights into different stereotype traits and the social meanings underlying the stereotypes. Interviews with eight students in a college in the Central Highlands, which were carried out in 2013, are the main data source. Findings reveal that the students highly appreciated Kinh people’s status-related traits and minority people’s solidarity-related traits. The stereotypes functioned as maintaining the social status quo – where the Kinh justified their position and advantages, while the minorities tended to accept the perceived social status hierarchies. Implications for diminishing negative stereotypes, improving minorities’ existing status, fostering trust-based cross-ethnic contact, and inspiring mutual respect among people of all ethnicities, are hence suggested.

scholarly journals Perceived Social Status and Suicidal Ideation in Maltreated Children and Adolescents

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelli L. Dickerson ◽  
Helen M. Milojevich ◽  
Jodi A. Quas
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Social Status ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Developmental Patterns ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Established Risk Factor ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Perceived Social Status

AbstractRecent decades have seen an alarming increase in rates of suicide among young people, including children and adolescents (“youth”). Although child maltreatment constitutes a well-established risk factor for suicidal ideation in youth, few efforts have focused on identifying factors associated with maltreated youths’ increased risk for suicidal ideation, especially across development. The present study examined the relations between maltreated youths' (N = 279, M = 12.06 years, 52% female, 53% Latinx) perceptions of their social status and suicidal ideation and compared those relations between pre-adolescents and adolescents. Findings revealed unique developmental patterns: Perceived social status was associated with suicidal ideation, but only in adolescents, who showed greater risk for suicidal ideation if they viewed themselves as lower ranked in society and lower risk for suicidal ideation if they viewed themselves as higher ranked in society. Findings have implications for scientific and practical efforts aimed at better understanding and preventing suicide in a high-risk developmental population.

Self-Perceived Social Status and Health in Older Hong Kong Chinese Women Compared with Men

2008 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Woo ◽  
H. Lynn ◽  
J. Leung ◽  
S. Y. Wong
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Social Status ◽  
Chinese Women ◽  
Hong Kong Chinese ◽  
Perceived Social Status

scholarly journals Perceived Social status and its organizational, managerial and political predictors among faculty members

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (40) ◽  
pp. 33-52
Author(s):  
حمید خانی پور ◽  
محمد نقی فراهانی ◽  
رضا عظیمی
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Perceived Social Status

Predicting dating behavior from aggression and self‐perceived social status in adolescence

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsty S. Lee ◽  
Heather Brittain ◽  
Tracy Vaillancourt
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Perceived Social Status
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document