How the Basis for Status Perceptions Varies with Perceiver Status

References

• Askin N, Bothner MS (2016) Status-aspirational pricing: The “Chivas Regal” strategy in U.S. higher education, 2006–2012. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(2):217–253.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Stuart T, Wang Y (2014) Matthew: Effect or fable? Management Sci. 60(1):92–109.Link, Google Scholar
• Bagwell LS, Bernheim BD (1996) Veblen effects in a theory of conspicuous consumption. Amer. Econom. Rev. 86(3):349–373.Google Scholar
• Benjamin BA, Podolny JM (1999) Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(3):563.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Betancourt N, Wezel FC (2016) The credibility of social climbing: When does inter-firm mobility [not] influence organizational status? Organ. Sci. 27(6):1435–1452.Link, Google Scholar
• Bidwell M, Won S, Barbulescu R, Mollick E (2015) I used to work at Goldman Sachs! How firms benefit from organizational status in the market for human capital: Status in the market for human capital. Strategic Management J. 36(8):1164–1173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowers A, Prato M (2018) The structural origins of unearned status: How arbitrary changes in categories affect status position and market impact. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(3):668–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bowers A, Prato M (2019) The role of third-party rankings in status dynamics: How does the stability of rankings induce status changes? Organ. Sci. 30(6):1146–1164.Link, Google Scholar
• Chu J (2021) Cameras of merit or engines of inequality? College ranking systems and the enrollment of disadvantaged students. Amer. J. Sociol. 126(6):1307–1346.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Ridgeway CL, Zuckerman EW, Jank S, Jordan-Bloch S, Nakagawa S (2017) It’s the conventional thought that counts: How third-order inference produces status advantage. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 82(2):297–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Espeland WN, Sauder M (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(1):1–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleischer A (2009) Ambiguity and the equity of rating systems: United States brokerage firms, 1995–2000. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(4):555–574.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goode WJ (1978) The Celebration of Heroes: Prestige as a Social Control System (University of California Press, Berkeley).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gould RV (2002) The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(5):1143–1178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayward MLA, Boeker W (1998) Power and conflicts of interest in professional firms: evidence from investment banking. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(1):1.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M (2006) Should we stay or should we go? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(1):97–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Kim H (2015) The real Oscar curse: The negative consequences of positive status shifts. Organ. Sci. 26(1):1–21.Link, Google Scholar
• Jensen M, Roy A (2008) Staging exchange partner choices: When do status and reputation Matter? Acad. Management J. 51(3):495–516.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kehoe RR, Lepak DP, Bentley FS (2018) Let’s call a star a star: Task performance, external status, and exceptional contributors in organizations. J. Management 44(5):1848–1872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ (2001) The promotion paradox: Organizational mortality and employee promotion chances in Silicon Valley law firms, 1946–1996. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(4):1058–1098.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phillips DJ, Zuckerman EW (2001) Middle‐status conformity: Theoretical restatement and empirical demonstration in two markets. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(2):379–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1993) A status-based model of market competition. Amer. J. Sociol. 98(4):829–872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (1994) Market uncertainty and the social character of economic exchange. Admin. Sci. Quart. 39(3):458–483.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM, Phillips DJ (1996) The dynamics of organizational status. Industrial Corporate Change 5(2):453–471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Prato M, Ferraro F (2018) Starstruck: How Hiring high-status employees affects incumbents’ performance. Organ. Sci. 29(5):755–774.Link, Google Scholar
• Reschke BP, Azoulay P, Stuart TE (2018) Status spillovers: The effect of status-conferring prizes on the allocation of attention. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(4):819–847.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rider CI, Tan D (2015) Labor market advantages of organizational status: A study of lateral partner hiring by large U.S. law firms. Organ. Sci. 26(2):356–372.Link, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL, Correll SJ (2006) Consensus and the creation of status beliefs. Soc. Forces 85(1):431–453.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL, Erickson KG (2000) Creating and spreading status beliefs. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(3):579–615.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL, Boyle EH, Kuipers KJ, Robinson DT (1998) How do status beliefs develop? The role of resources and interactional experience. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 63(3):331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivera LA (2011) Ivies, extracurriculars, and exclusion: Elite employers’ use of educational credentials. Res. Soc. Stratification Mobility 29(1):71–90.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scharfstein DS, Stein JC (1990) Herd behavior and investment. Amer. Econom. Rev. 80(3):465–479.Google Scholar
• Sharkey AJ, Kovács B (2018) The many gifts of status: How attending to audience reactions drives the use of status. Management Sci. 64(11):5422–5443.Link, Google Scholar
• Simcoe TS, Waguespack DM (2011) Status, quality, and attention: What’s in a (missing) name? Management Sci. 57(2):274–290.Link, Google Scholar
• Stuart TE, Hoang H, Hybels RC (1999) Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tajfel H, Turner J (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Austin WG, Worchel S, eds. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Brooks/Cole Publishing, Monterey, CA), 33–47.Google Scholar
• Tan D, Rider CI (2017) Let them go? How losing employees to competitors can enhance firm status. Strategic Management J. 38(9):1848–1874.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B, Lancaster R (2004) Embeddedness and price formation in the corporate law market. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 69(3):319–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Veblen T (1953) Theory of the Leisure Class (New American Library, New York).Google Scholar
• Zuckerman EW (2012) Construction, concentration, and (dis)continuities in social valuations. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38(1):223–245.Crossref, Google Scholar