Picking Up the Gauntlet: How Individuals Respond to Status Challenges

By Christine L. Porath, Jennifer R. Overbeck, Christine M. Pearson. 2008

135 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e6e7ce14355f085289d6447dd5edf03781ff4ac1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Emotional and Behavioral Responses to Workplace Incivility and the Impact of Hierarchical Status (2012, background): “Targets weigh the level of status challenge, the legitimacy of the challenger’s actions (given his or her status), and potential consequences of their responses (Porath et al., 2008).”
Workplace incivility: A review of the literature and agenda for future research (2016, background): “Porath et al. (2008) and Kim and Shapiro (2008) asked study participants to read a scenario that included an uncivil interaction condition, and Montgomery, Kane, and Vance (2004) presented participants with video segments that showed uncivil conduct.”
Does gender diversity help teams constructively manage status conflict? An evolutionary perspective of status conflict, team psychological safety, and team creativity (2018, methodology): “…groups because the use of aggressive tactics becomes a common and acceptable method to win conflicts (for male-dominant groups, see Anderson et al., 2001; Correll, 2004, and Porath et al., 2008; for female-dominant groups, see Archer, 2004; Oesterman et al., 1998, and Griskevicius et al., 2009).”
Emotion is for influence (2011, background): “People tend to accept more undesired behaviour from high-status others than from low-status others (Porath, Overbeck, & Pearson, 2008 ; Van Kleef, Homan, Finkenauer, Gundermir, & Stamkou, 2011), and therefore expressions of anger from low-status others are more likely to arouse negative affective r”
I feel, therefore you act: Intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of emotion on negotiation as a function of social power (2010, background): “three different codes: overall impression used the framework of self-interest and other-interest, following Pruitt (1981) and Fragale, Kim, and Neale (2002) in conceptualizing integrativeness as a point maximizing both self-interest and other-interest.”
Witnessing wrongdoing: the effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace (2017, methodology): “We measured status challenge using five items (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), two of which were adapted from Porath, Overbeck, and Pearson (2008) and three of which were developed for the present study (building on Porath et al., 2008).”
Status Conflict in Groups (2012, background): “People engage in status contests (Blau 1964, Maclay and Knipe 1972, Owens and Sutton 2001, Zhou 2005) and status auctions (Sutton and Hargadon 1996), and may overtly challenge the status of others (Polzer and Caruso 2008, Porath et al. 2008), to sort out their relative social standing.”
Researching Rudeness: The Past, Present, and Future of the Science of Incivility (2017, unknown): “Further, Porath, Overbeck, and Pearson (2008) T hi s do cu m en t is co py ri gh te d by th e A m er ic an Ps yc ho lo gi ca l A ss oc ia tio n or on e of its al lie d pu bl is he rs .”
Breaking the Rules to Rise to Power (2011, background): “Powerful people also exhibit more aggression (Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973), and this is relatively acceptable to others (Porath, Overbeck, & Pearson, 2008).”