Assimilation or Contrast? Status Inequality, Judgment of Product Quality, and Product Choices in Markets

References

• Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58:277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atkinson AB (1983) The Economics of Inequality, 2nd ed. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Bendersky C, Shah N (2012) The cost of status enhancement: Performance effects of individual’s status mobility in task groups. Organ. Sci. 23:308–322.Link, Google Scholar
• Benjamin BA, Podolny JM (1999) Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:563–589.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berry WD, Feldman S (1985) Multiple Regression in Practice (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM (1977) A macrosociological theory of social structure. Amer. J. Sociol. 83:26–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bogaczyk J (2003) Herd’s opportunities in Conference USA are legitimate. Charleston Daily Mail (October 16), 1B.Google Scholar
• Canfield O (1988) [No title]. Associated Press (December 28), 1–2.Google Scholar
• Castellucci F, Ertug G (2010) What’s in it for them? Advantages of higher-status partners in exchange relationships. Acad. Management J. 53:149–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y-R, Peterson RS, Phillips DJ, Podolny JM, Ridgeway CL (2012) Introduction to the special issue: Bringing status to the table—attaining, maintaining, and experiencing status in organizations and markets. Organ. Sci. 23:299–307.Link, Google Scholar
• Cowen A (2012) An expanded model of status dynamics: The effects of status transfer on inter-firm coordination. Acad. Management J. 55:1169–1186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cunha M, Shulman JD (2011) Assimilation and contrast in price evaluation. J. Consumer Res. 37:822–835.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denrell J (2012) Mechanisms generating context-dependent choices. Res. Sociol. Organ. 36:65–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Donaton S (1989) Bowl’s “integrity” takes a thrashing. Advertising Age (August 21), S-6.Google Scholar
• Espeland WN, Sauder M (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. Amer. J. Sociol. 113:1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Espeland WN, Stevens ML (1998) Commensuration as a social process. Annual Rev. Sociol. 24:313–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• ESPN (1990–2004) ESPN Information Please Almanac (Hyperion ESPN Books, New York).Google Scholar
• Fatsis S (2003) In college football, also-rans fight for bigger share of the pot. Wall Street J. (November 25), A1.Google Scholar
• Frank RH, Cook PJ (1995) The Winner-Take-All Society (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Gini C (1912) Variabilita e Mutabilita (Cuppini, Bologna).Google Scholar
• Goode WJ (1978) The Celebration of Heroes (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).Google Scholar
• Gould R (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. Amer. J. Sociol. 107:1143–1178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gujarati DN (2003) Basic Econometrics, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill, Boston).Google Scholar
• Haller AO (1970) Changes in the structure of status systems. Rural Sociol. 35:469–487.Google Scholar
• Hausman JA (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46:1251–1271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He JY, Huang Z (2011) The informal hierarchy of the board of directors and firm financial performance: Exploring a tacit structure guiding boardroom interactions. Acad. Management J. 54:1119–1139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herr PM (1986) Consequences of priming: Judgment and behavior. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 51:1106–1115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herr PM, Sherman SJ, Fazio RH (1983) On the consequences of priming: Assimilation and contrast effects. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 19:323–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Higgins ET (1996) Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW, eds. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles (Guilford Press, New York), 133–168.Google Scholar
• Huber J, Payne JW, Puto C (1982) Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. J. Consumer Res. 9:90–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Isenberg DJ (1986) Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 50:1141–1151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jasso G (2001) Studying status: An integrated framework. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 66:96–124.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M (2003) The role of network resources in market entry: Commercial banks’ entry into investment banking, 1991–1997. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48:466–497.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krishna A, Wagner M, Yoon C, Adaval R (2006) Effects of extreme-priced products on consumer reservation prices. J. Consumer Psych. 16:176–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee MP, Suk K (2010) Disambiguating the role of ambiguity in perceptual assimilation and contrast effects. J. Consumer Res. 36:890–897.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leifer E (1990) Inequality among equals: Embedding market and authority in league sports. Amer. J. Sociol. 96:655–683.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerman RI, Yitzhaki S (1984) A note on the calculation and interpretation of the Gini index. Econom. Lett. 15:363–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad. Management Ann. 2:351–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mandel S (2008) Bowls, Polls, and Tattered Souls (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science. Science 159:56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mussweiler T (2003) Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and consequences. Psych. Rev. 110:472–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Niedrich RW, Sharma S, Wedell DH (2001) Reference price and price perceptions: A comparison of alternative models. J. Consumer Res. 28:339–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ours RM (2004) Bowl Games: College Football’s Greatest Tradition (Westholme, Yardley, PA).Google Scholar
• Parducci A (1963) Range-frequency compromise in judgment. Psych. Monographs: General Appl. 77:1–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peterson (1976–2004) Peterson’s Guide to Four-Year Colleges, various volumes (Peterson, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ, Zuckerman EW (2001) Middle-status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. Amer. J. Sociol. 107:379–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1993) A status-based model of market competition. Amer. J. Sociol. 98:829–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2005) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Phillips DJ (1996) The dynamics of organizational status. Indust. Corporate Change 5:453–472.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Scott Morton FM (1998) Social status, entry, and predation: The case of British shipping cartels 1879–1929. J. Indust. Econom. 47:41–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabin M, Schrag JL (1999) First impression matters: A model confirmatory bias. Quart. J. Econom. 114:37–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rao H, Monin P, Durand R (2003) Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. Amer. J. Sociol. 108:795–843.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roehm ML, Tybout AM (2006) When will a brand scandal spill over, and how should competitors respond? J. Marketing Res. 43:366–373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauder M, Lynn F, Podolny JM (2012) Status: Insights from organizational sociology. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38:267–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherif M, Hovland CI (1953) Judgmental phenomena and scales of attitude measurement: Placement of items with individual choice of number of categories. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 48:135–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sherif M, Hovland CI (1961) Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Sherif M, Taub D, Hovland CI (1958) Assimilation and contrast effects of anchoring stimuli on judgments. J. Experiment. Psych. 55:150–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stapel DA (2007) In the mind of the beholder: The interpretation comparison model of accessibility effects. Stapel DA, Suls J, eds. Assimilation and Contrast in Social Psychology (Psychology Press, New York), 143–164.Google Scholar
• Stapel DA, Winkielman P (1998) Assimilation and contrast as a function of context-target similarity, distinctness, and dimensional relevance. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 24:634–646.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stinchcombe A (1965) Social structure and organizations. March JG, ed. Handbook of Organizations (Rand McNally, Chicago), 142–193.Google Scholar
• Stroud R (1987) Fame Bowl in limbo on sponsor. St. Petersburg Times (October 29), 6C.Google Scholar
• Stuart TE, Hoang H, Hybels RC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44:315–349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psych. 5:207–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgments under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Simonson I (1993) Context-dependent preferences. Management Sci. 39:1179–1189.Link, Google Scholar
• Volkmann J (1951) Scales of judgment and their implications for social psychology. Rohrer JH, Sherif M, eds. Social Psychology at the Crossroads (Harper, New York), 273–296.Google Scholar
• Washington M, Zajac EJ (2005) Status evolution and competition: Theory and evidence. Acad. Management J. 48:281–296.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber M (1978) Roth G, Wittich C, eds. Economy and Society (University of California Press, Berkeley).Google Scholar
• Wedell DH, Hicklin SK, Smarandescu LO (2007) Contrasting models of assimilation and contrast. Stapel DA, Suls J, eds. Assimilation and Contrast in Social Psychology (Psychology Press, New York), 45–74.Google Scholar