GU4124 Status, Evaluation, and Inequality
Fall 2022 | Fridays 10:10a - 12p
Room: 509 Knox
Office hours: 1-2:30pm Tuesdays, please sign up here
Instructor Email: jyc2163@columbia.edu
Course Summary
What is this course about?
Who gets respect? On what basis? Differences in respect and esteem are a basic form of inequality, with consequences for the (re)production of other inequalities and their durability. The goal of this course is to equip you to see the throughline between status, evaluation, and inequality. Along the way, you will learn how social psychological theories at the micro-level relate to macro-level inequalities. We will tackle questions like the following: Why, and how, do status hierarchies emerge in nearly all societies and groups? How do status differences affect material inequalities like access to jobs? Why is it so hard to change inaccurate stereotypes about women or racial minorities?
What is the structure of course sessions?
This is a survey course. Each week we will discuss key readings on a topic. Class will meet once per week and requires participation.
This seminar is designed to generate new research ideas. To do so, the course will push you to understand key ideas in an expansive literature, and you will be asked to submit short papers that meaningfully extend the ideas in the readings.
You may choose to write an empirical or conceptual paper. For an empirical paper, you should outline an original empirical study somehow informed by or related to the week’s readings. Your summary should be organized in the following four sections: (1) a research question (1-2 sentences), (2) a description of methods (2-3 paragraphs), (3) your prediction(s) (1-2 sentences), and (4) why the study would be interesting and/or important (2-3 sentences).
For a conceptual paper, you should advance one or more of the week’s readings in some way. Examples include: (a) connnecting ideas from two or more papers to develop a more general theory; critiquing ideas in one or more papers and proposing an alternative that you argue is better or more valid; developing a rival theory to challenge the ideas in one or more papers. In your conceptual paper, underline your main thesis statement(s) (1-2 sentences).
What kind of student does this course have in mind?
This is a graduate survey course that is also open to advanced undergraduate students in Sociology and related disciplines. There are no formal pre-requisites.
How will performance be assessed?
There are four requirements for this class.
| Assignment | Description | Deadlines |
|---|---|---|
| Short papers (30%) | Choose any four (4) weeks to submit either an empirical or conceptual short paper. You may submit more than four, and the best four will constitute your final grade | Due throughout the semester via upload to Coursework by 11:59pm the day before class. |
| Final paper (30%) | This class does not have a conventional final paper. Rather, the final paper is an opportunity for you to further develop your research creativity. The final paper will consist of 3 short papers. Let me know if an alternative format would be preferred (e.g. draft research proposal, draft paper). | The final paper is due via upload to Coursework by 11:59pm on Dec 11. You are welcome to submit these in advance. |
| Leading discussion (10%) | On the second week of class, please sign up to be discussion leaders for one of the weeks. As a discussion leader, you will communicate to the class what you see as the most important points raised by the readings and prompt additional discussion about them. | |
| Class participation (30%) | Participation refers to informed contributions to the class. Contributions should be linked to what others have said or concretely to something in the readings. In addition to in-class participation, select readings will be included on Perusall to help us collectively engage with the readings. Perusall is like Google Docs for the readings: you can highlight, comment, discuss, tag, and otherwise share your questions or observations about each text. Some people will contribute more in class, others will contribute more through online comments. Both are valid forms of participation. |
What are the basic norms in this course?
- If you need disability-related accommodations, let me know as soon as possible. You have the right to have your needs met. If you need accommodations, you should be registered with the Office of Disability Services (ODS) in 008 Milbank (212-854-2388, disability@columbia.edu).
- Life happens. If you submit your work after the deadlines listed above and before the final class of the semester, you can still receive up to 90% of the original points. (But, don’t expect to receive comments.)
- Avoid using cell phones in class, which can prevent you or others from learning. In cases of emergencies, please take your phone outside.
- I try to respond to emails within 24 hours. You are welcome to follow-up if I have not responded by then.
What are expectations regarding academic integrity?
Students are expected to exhibit the highest level of personal and academic honesty as they engage in scholarly discourse and research. In practical terms, you must be responsible for the full and accurate attribution of the ideas of others in all of your research papers and projects.
Where can I access course materials?
The readings for each week of this course are listed below and can be accessed by the links. For longer or more methodologically complex research papers, reading notes will be provided on Perusall. You are not expected to read and understand all elements.
The following are books you might want to own, and which we will read substantial portions from. All three books have also been placed on library reserve:
- Tilly, Charles. 1998. Durable Inequality. University of California Press.
- Ridgeway, Cecilia L. 2019. Status: Why Is It Everywhere? Why Does It Matter? New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
- Goode, William J. 1978. The Celebration of Heroes: Prestige as a Control System. Berkeley: UC Press.
Readings and Due Dates for Assignments
Part I. How Status Distinctions Emerge in Groups
Week 1. What Is Status? (Sept 9)
- Ridgeway Ch1 and Ch3
Week 2: Status Hierarchies Coordinate Action (Sept 16)
- Goode Ch1, Ch2, and Ch3
- Simmel, Georg. 2008 [1903]. “Soziologie der Konkurrenz – Sociology of Competition.” The Canadian Journal of Sociology 33(4). (read pp 957-968)
Week 3: Status Distinctions within Groups (Sept 23)
- Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. 2009. The Pursuit of Status in Social Groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18(5): 295–298.
- Gould, Roger V. 2002. “The Origins of Status Hierarchies: A Formal Theory and Empirical Test.” American Journal of Sociology 107(5):1143-1178.
- Corinne Bendersky, Nicholas A. Hays. 2011. “Status Conflict in Groups.” Organization Science 23(2): 323-340.
- Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. 2013. “Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104(1): 103–125.
Week 4: (E)valuation – Status on What, and Whose, Basis? (Sept 30)
- Ridgeway Ch2
- Goode Ch9
- Stark, David. 2011. The sense of dissonance: Accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton University Press. ( ch1)
- Boltanski and Thevenot. 2006. On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Ch6 - on CW)
Week 5: From Status to Status Beliefs (Oct 7)
- Ridgeway Ch4
- Goode Ch4, Ch5
- Berger, Joseph, Bernard P. Cohen, and Morris Zelditch Jr. 1972. “Status characteristics and social interaction.” American Sociological Review 37(3): 241-255.
- Ridgeway, C. L. and Shelly. J. Correll. 2006. “Consensus and the Creation of Status Beliefs.” Social Forces 85(1):431–53.
PART II. From Status Beliefs to Material Inequalities
Week 6: Durable Inequality (Oct 14)
- Ridgeway Ch6
- Tilly Ch1-Ch3
- Avent-Holt, Dustin, and Donald Tomaskovic-Devey. “A relational theory of earnings inequality.” American Behavioral Scientist 58, no. 3 (2014): 379-399.
Week 7: Varieties of Discrimination (Oct 21)
- Altonji, J. G., & Pierret, C. R. 2001. “Employer Learning and Statistical Discrimination.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 313–350.
- Correll, Shelley J., Stephen Benard, and In Paik. 2007. “Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?” American Journal of Sociology 112(5): 1297-1338.
- Pedulla, David S. “The positive consequences of negative stereotypes: Race, sexual orientation, and the job application process.” Social Psychology Quarterly 77, no. 1 (2014): 75-94.
- Abraham, Mabel. “Gender-role incongruity and audience-based gender bias: An examination of networking among entrepreneurs.” Administrative Science Quarterly 65, no. 1 (2020): 151-180.
- Melamed, D., Munn, C. W., Barry, L., Montgomery, B., & Okuwobi, O. F. (2019). “Status Characteristics, Implicit Bias, and the Production of Racial Inequality.” American Sociological Review, 84(6), 1013–1036.
Week 8: Categories and Closure (Oct 28)
- Parkin, Frank. 1979. Marxism and Class Theory: A Bourgeois Critique. New York: Columbia University Press. (Ch1, Ch4)
- Rivera, Lauren A. 2012. “Hiring as Cultural Matching: The Case of Elite Professional Service Firms.” American Sociological Review 77(6):999-1022.
- Fiel, Jeremy. 2015. “Closing Ranks: Closure, Status Competition, and School Segregation.” American Journal of Sociology 121(1):126-170.
- Riccardo Fini, Julien Jourdan, Markus Perkmann, Laura Toschi (2022) “A New Take on the Categorical Imperative: Gatekeeping, Boundary Maintenance, and Evaluation Penalties in Science.” Organization Science.
Week 9: Cumulative (Dis)advantages (Nov 4)
- DiPrete, Thomas A., and Gregory M. Eirich. 2006. “Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequality: A review of theoretical and empirical developments.” Annu. Rev. Sociol. 32: 271-297.
- Lynn, Freda B., Joel M. Podolny, and Lin Tao. “A sociological (de) construction of the relationship between status and quality.” American Journal of Sociology 115, no. 3 (2009): 755-804.
- Bothner, Matthew S., Joel M. Podolny, and Edward Bishop Smith. 2011. “Organizing Contests for Status: The Matthew Effect vs. the Mark Effect.” Management Science 57(3): 439-457.
- van de Rijt, Arnout. 2019. “Self-Correcting Dynamics in Social Influence Processes.” American Journal of Sociology 124(5):1468-1495.
Week 10: Institutionalized Status – Conventions and Metrics (Nov 11)
- Espeland, Wendy Nelson, and Mitchell L. Stevens. 1998. “Commensuration as a Social Process.” Annual Review of Sociology 24(1): 313-343.
- Correll, Shelley J., Cecilia L. Ridgeway, Ezra W. Zuckerman, Sharon Jank, Sara Jordan-Bloch, and Sandra Nakagawa. 2017. “It’s the Conventional Thought That Counts.” American Sociological Review 82(2):297–327.
- Fourcade, Marion, and Kieran Healy. “Classification situations: Life-chances in the neoliberal era.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 38, no. 8 (2013): 559-572.
- Kiviat, Barbara. 2019. “The Moral Limits of Predictive Practices: The Case of Credit-Based Insurance Scores.” American Sociological Review.
- Rivera, Lauren and Andras Tilcik. 2020. “Scaling Down Inequality: Rating Scales, Gender Bias, and the Architecture of Evaluation.” American Sociological Review.
Week 11: Organizations and the Status Game (Nov 18)
- Podolny, Joel M. 1993. “A status-based model of market competition.” American Journal of Sociology 98(4): 829-872.
- Sauder, Michael, Freda Lynn, and Joel M. Podolny. “Status: Insights from organizational sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology 38, no. 1 (2012): 267-283.
- Chu, James. 2021. “Cameras of Merit or Engines of Inequality? The Effect of College Rankings on the Enrollment of Disadvantaged Students.” American Journal of Sociology 126(6): 1307-1346.
- Askin, N., & Bothner, M. S. (2016). “Status-Aspirational Pricing: The “Chivas Regal” Strategy in U.S. Higher Education, 2006–2012.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(2): 217–253.
Week 12 - Thanksgiving Break, No Class (Nov 25)
Week 13: Legitimacy (Dec 2)
- Giridharadas, Anand. 2018. Winners Take All. [ch4]
- Leslie McCall, Derek Burk, Marie Laperrière, Jennifer A. Richeson. 2017. “Rising inequality shapes opportunity beliefs.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(36): 9593-9598.
- Lamont, Michèle. 2000. The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press. ch1
- Hahl, O., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2014). “The Denigration of Heroes? How the Status Attainment Process Shapes Attributions of Considerateness and Authenticity.” American Journal of Sociology, 120(2), 504–554.
Week 14: Presentations (Dec 9)
❗ Final Papers Due (11:59pm on Dec 11)