Status: Why Is It Everywhere? Why Does It Matter?

by Cecilia L. Ridgeway

Status is ubiquitous in modern life, yet our understanding of its role as a driver of inequality is limited. In Status, sociologist and social psychologist Cecilia Ridgeway examines how this ancient and universal form of inequality influences today’s ostensibly meritocratic institutions and why it matters. She illuminates the complex ways in which status affects human interactions as we work together towards common goals, such as in classroom discussions, family decisions, or workplace deliberations.

Genres: Fashion, Nonfiction, Psychology, Sociology, Academic

224 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2019

Reviews

[Dee · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a useful review of sociological status research, mostly based in the United States and with a significant degree of bias for organizational psychology. Sometimes it feels like a book on organizational leadership rather than a critical engagement with systemic status inequity. The final chapters get better (at least in my opinion) when Ridgeway shifts towards a more socially critical—but never barn-burning—approach to status differentials and their maintenance over time. She mostly talks about racial, class, and gender inequities (sometimes educational attainment and professional attainment make an appearance, too), but is definitely not interested in status hierarchies based on sexuality, nationality, religion, or any other “softer” (i.e., cultural) axes of identity. She never talks about how status inequities give rise to violence—the focus is mostly on task-oriented groups in institutional settings. My sense is that hers is an extremely conservative field and that this is the most that she could get away with before being labeled a Marxist feminist by her Stanford peers. The great downside of this book—although the topic is of great interest to anyone who cares about inequality—is that it is bloodlessly written. The prose is dry as bone and, even when one senses some of Ridgeway’s anger, her style remains uninteresting and flat throughout.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 5 out of 5]

I see status-seeking everywhere, so when I recently learned of Cecilia Ridgeway’s work, I knew I had to read her book. She is a sociologist and social psychologist who also realizes how status appears everywhere, and that’s why I loved this book so damn much. Ridgeway has done years of research to see how people seek status in every situation and how it plays a role in how we make decisions in groups. Whether we realize it or not, there are battles for status happening everywhere and in all of our situations, and Ridgeway discusses how status can change depending on who we’re around and what the situation calls for.

This is one of my new favorite books on the topic because it has so much fresh research and great insight from the author. Cecilia has done so much research, and she’s passionate about figuring out solutions for how status creates inequality in our society. I can’t wait to read more of her books, and she also recommended some books that I’m excited to read as well.

[Jim Fix · Rating 1 out of 5]

When I began this short book I felt like a freshman in an advanced senior class--way over my head. But why the author's pugnacious attitude? Throughout she uses phrases like "I contend," "I maintain," "argue,", "declare," etc. Why not "I suggest," "I propose,"I think" . . .? This from a person writing to someone trying to learn from her. I don't feel like arguing or contending at all. I feel like learning, and this presentation made that goal very difficult. The writing was ponderous, greatly favoring four-syllable words and twenty-plus word sentences over other forms of communication. At the end, I got i: This sounded, not like a lecture, but like a fearful graduate student defending her thesis. As for the main points, they seemed obvious and well established, possibly enlightening the field a little at best.

[Kevin Postlewaite · Rating 3 out of 5]

Academic, finely detailed hypotheses. Caveat: it wasn't what I was looking for so I mostly skimmed after first two chapters. Unfortunately, while there is some mention of game theory, the thinking about strategic multi-agent interactions is pretty unsophisticated so I believe that the author fails to consider obvious complex hypotheses and is mis-led into thinking her own hypotheses are strongly supported by the simple experiments run. Given that this is meant to be foundational it is a critical failing and does not move understanding forward though the questions posed are interesting.