A Comparative Study on the Value Men and Women Place on Status

This topic submitted by Adrianne Mikosz and James Tate (jamesandrewtate@yahoo.com) at 6:41 pm on 5/4/01. Additions were last made on Friday, May 4, 2001. Section: Myers.

A Comparative Study on the Value Men and Women Place on Status
Authors: Adrianne Mikosz and James Tate

Abstract

This study looks at the different ways men and women value status by studying the relative levels of importance of status men and women report in their lives, the different areas of life in which men and women seek status, and comparative motivations for achieving status. One hundred forty nine surveys were distributed and collected. Sixty nine male responses and 79 female responses were analyzed. Results suggest that men and women value status among their colleagues more than among their friends or family, however, a significantly higher amount of males value status among their friends than do females. The study also suggests that neither males nor females value status more than the other, however, males are more likely to value status in order to achieve control over those around them, whereas females are shown, with statistical significance, to value status because of its ability to elicit emotional support. Different dynamics of how status fits into the lives of males and females are hinted at, and further studies regarding the ways that status affects and is played out in the co-ed work force are mentioned.

Introduction

Hierarchies are found within virtually every sphere of our lives. From the day we are born, we enter into a system of complex, graded arrangements, where we fall where we fall, and then strive to climb higher. As infants, we cry for, cling to, and follow after our caregivers, as depends on our self-sufficient superiors, presumably to get the help and attention necessary to move up the ladder of autonomy. Ethnologists have noted that in pre-school we form "dominance hierarchies", or "pecking orders", whereby we socially rank each group member, and use our perceived rankings to determine when it would be in our best interest to submit to another member of the group rather than to start what is likely to be a losing battle (6). Then we move into the cruel world of grade school where lunch money is the ultimate sacrifice, offered by the unfortunate kids situated at the bottom of the social-ladder, and on into high school, where homage is paid to the 6Õ8" football player who not only wins the respect of all the teacher-coaches in the school, but who is seen carrying two to three lady shoulder-ornaments at any given time during the day.
As is evident, we cannot evade hierarchies. Status differentiation is a part of our lives, and thereÕs no escaping it, no matter how hard we try. And because we will always fall somewhere on a hierarchical ladder in any given situation, a rule of status-achievement seems to emerge: dominate or be dominated. Psychoanalyst Alfred Adler proposed a theory which essentially states that we are involved in a never-ending effort to gain superiority (1) and DarwinÕs theory of natural selection would tend to agree. According to natural selection theory, most, if not all, of our drives in life (whether conscious or unconscious) aim to ensure that our own genes are successfully spread into the next generation. Thus, it makes sense in evolutionary terms that weÕd engage in efforts (i.e. to increase status) whose successes resulted in privileges and benefits, sometimes at the expense of others, that would therefore tender more resources to boost our own gene-spreading success. However, Adler also points out that "the struggle takes different forms for different people, and it [even] seems impossible to some, who [ultimately] resign themselves to defeat [and submission]" (1). Again, natural selection theory and psychobiology would likely not argue with this notion. Natural Selection theory finds a good argument for the apparent occurrence of both dominant and submissive people through John Maynard SmithÕs hawk-dove hypothesis. Essentially, it states that in our evolutionary environment, "dominants" exploited "submissives" to the point where more and more "dominants" encountered each other. Eventually, "submissives" had to emerge from these "dominant-dominant" battles, which finally resulted in a group of "dominants" that could ultimately win battles, and a group of "submissives" that would surrender resources to avoid being killed.
Interesting applications of this phenomenon are found in many different spheres of our societies today, but one of the most popular and highly studied applications of this notion regards the question of who actually takes on the dominant roles and who takes on the submissive roles in todayÕs society. Of course, different types of people will tend to take different roles depending on what hierarchy is being considered, but an interesting realm to isolate and examine is that of men and women. Few will argue that traditional sex roles have historically existed in our culture that give females a subordinate position in society (although many strides have been made toward female equality). Studies have shown that, on average, men actually have a bigger drive and motivation for power and place more value on high-status and fitting inside hierarchies than women do. For example, one study printed in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin qualitatively examined interactions between various employees of a company to look at the dynamics between male and female interaction. (5) This study found that men in a workplace environment tended to actively seek out positions and stances of power more than women. This pertains to a particular question we are addressing which regards an overall value and importance that men and women place on having status. Do men really seek out power overall more than women, or do they just do so in different areas than do women?
Another study conducted to examine the relationship between desire for group-based dominance, gender, and group attachment scored social dominance on a contrived number scale, and found again, that men, scored higher in the area of social dominance in a group setting, across ethic groups (2). This suggests that men are more drawn toward having status among social groups, which is something this study looks into as well. In what settings are males and females more actively seeking or desiring status?
Having higher status in society provides an individual with more access to resources. Higher status proves the fitness of the individual in the given social environment. Proof of fitness and access to resources makes one a desirable mate because the traits that brought success to an individual of high status may be passed on to offspring. On an evolutionary level, a larger drive for status and greater desire for fitting within hierarchies would make sense for men, who have a much larger reproductive potential than females. It makes sense evolutionarily for men to compete for access to females, and therefore having high status and the corresponding reproductive benefits. Men need to compete for women, and any advantage, much less one as potent as status, is very desirable. Since females have relatively limited potential when it comes to creating an abundance of viable offspring, their reproductive stakes in having status is not so great. Because women are in high demand reproductively, their prospects of securing a mate are virtually certain. Women benefit from choosing a successful male because they are assured mates but have only limited reproductive potential due to their high parental investment. However, for men, who have a very large reproduction potential (having virtually no limit on the number of offspring they can have) status is an important resource for getting genes spread.
For the aforementioned reasons, we hypothesize that men will place a higher value on status than women. It is more important to men to possess traits deemed desirable by women from an evolutionary standpoint. Reproduction for males in the natural world is highly competitive, so males would seem to naturally compete amongst themselves to gain status. Males should therefore place a higher value on status in society, as well as show a propensity for values and traits that would increase status in our society. We suspect that gaining and retaining power in a social environment will be more important to males than females. On the other hand, our society has taken numerous steps to equalize power relationships in society. Women find themselves on increasingly equal social footing with men, and are beginning to compete in all fields with men. Parental investment is also more equal in our society. Men have legal, moral, and social pressure placed on them to share a heavy burden in child rearing. This could have a mitigating effect on differences in status competition in males and females. Men in our society carry a large portion of parental investment. Consequently, they ought to be more careful in choosing a mate. This could lead to competition between females for social status, and it is possible that we will find men and women to be more equal in their competition for status and value of hierarchy. While social factors play a heavy role in the shaping of our behaviors, we still expect to find men placing a higher value on status. Male competition has been ingrained in our behavior for millennia, and still finds its place in modern social interaction.

Relevance

There are many resources available that discuss study of gender relations, dominance and submission, and hierarchical scales. Some we found useful and/or cited in this introduction are referenced in the literature review at the end of this report. The materials cited in the introduction deal with both theory and research related to social status and hierarchy in humans. Current theories suggest that humans have a propensity for developing hierarchies within their societies, and that these hierarchies are of particular importance to males. The research that we have found supports these theories.
While we did find research to support theories of hierarchy in humans and its evolutionary and social advantages, we were unable to find other studies that deal with our particular topic, differences in the value placed on social status and the traits needed to gain social status between males and females. Our study should help to shed light on an area of human behavior that it is difficult to access information on. The question of how humans jockey for power in society is an important one whose answers allow us to better understand the way we interact with one another. Studying the differences between men and women in hierarchical behavior and formations will help us to better understand how the sexes relate to one another. Our study may also help to shed light on changes that have occurred in social organization and behavior that have altered the behaviors predicted by social biologists and other students of the human condition. Humans have made drastic changes in the arrangement of society and the relationship between the sexes. Many of these changes, particularly those affecting womenÕs role in society and gender relationships, have taken place in the last half-century. Our study should help to illuminate the way that these social changes are affecting human behavior and alterations in human behavior from what has been predicted by social biologists. We should also learn the extent to which these theories still hold true.

Materials and Methods

Our experimental design consists of passing out 150 surveys designed to judge the value that people place on status in different areas of their lives. We will also be testing the value placed on traits and behaviors that increase status in society. Our focus group is college age men and women at Miami University in Oxford, OH. Our survey is designed to determine and compare the different value that males and females place on status in different areas of their lives. Taking into consideration several dynamics of status itself, our survey is also designed to determine what benefits of status males and females seek, the magnitude of value men and women place on status as a whole, and what they are willing to do to gain status in society (used as a measure of how important status is to them.) Our data for this study will be derived from survey results, and the materials that we will be using consist of the survey themselves. Our other methods will consist of applying information from outside sources to the data that we have gathered. Our survey is included on the following page.

Sex: Male Female Other Age: ____

Feel free to make additional comments in the margin where you feel it is necessary

1. Please rank the following scenarios in order of most desirable to least desirable:

____ You are the most popular among your group of friends, the "leader of the pack"
____ You are the highest ranking, most respected, and highest paid employee at work, or the top student in your major
____ You are the "favorite" in your family (most important in decisions, your time is in highest demand, etc.)

2. Please rate from one to ten the importance of status to you in each of the following scenarios (1 being highest importance and 10 being lowest importance):

3. What about having high status is most desirable to you (please rank from most (1) desirable to least (6) desirable)?

____ Ability to gain material wealth
____ Ability to gain social status (respect, etc)
____ Ability to gain mates
____ Ability to control those around you
____ Ability to gain emotional support
____ Other reasons _____________________________________

4. How important is status to you in the scenario that you ranked highest in question one?

1. Very important
2. Important
3. Indifferent
4. Unimportant
5. Very unimportant

5. What/how much would you be willing to sacrifice to achieve/maintain status in the scenario that you ranked highest in question one? (This could be a relationship, a material object, an amount of time, etc.)
___________________________________________________________

How important to you is that which you chose to sacrifice?

1. Very important
2. Important
3. Indifferent
4. Unimportant
5. Very unimportant

6. How willing would you be to make a decision that increases your status but may harm someone that you donÕt know?

1. Very willing
2. Willing
3. Indifferent
4. Unwilling
5. Very unwilling

Each question in our survey is designed to test specific aspects of the value that men and women place on status, the traits that they deem desirable, and the importance of status to them. Question 1 is designed to test the areas of the subjectÕs life in which they feel that status is most important. The question is phrased to get the subject to rank three scenarios of high status from most to least desirable. This will allow us to determine where men and women find status most desirable, as well as the areas of their life that are most important for them. Question 2 will help us to determine the importance that men and women place on status in each of the areas ranked in question 1. The answer to this question will help us to determine the overall value that the subject places on social status, as well as how important status is to them in each area. Question 3 asks the subject to rank the benefits gained from status that is most important to them. We ask directly the importance that status has to the subject as a way to gain mates. We also ask about the importance of other benefits that could either stand alone or function to attract mates in our society. Question 4 serves as both a check on questions 1 and 2, as well as a direct source of information of how important status is to the individual. Question 5 asks the subject to state something that is important to them, and then how willing they would be to sacrifice it to achieve status. We designed this question to allow us to judge the willingness of the individual to sacrifice something important to them by having them state what is important subjectively without our having to establish rigid items of value. This will allow us to more accurately gauge the individualÕs willingness to make sacrifices to gain status, and thus judge the importance that they place on status. Question 6 asks the subject to state how willing they are to harm a stranger to gain status for himself or herself. We phrased the question to avoid personal attachment coloring the response. We felt that this would provide more accurate information as to how willing the subject was to harm another to gain status.

Results/ Discussion

See following link for data analysis:

click here

Graph 1 illustrates the preferred areas of status among males and females as dictated by our survey results. It displays the information as an element of total percents of males and total percents of females who chose the given category (preferred area of status) as top priority. Table 1a. lists the actual raw data, or number of males and females surveyed who ranked each given category as Ò1Ó or Òtop priority.Ó Table 1b gives summary statistics for Table 1a, which looks at all three categories of traits as a whole. Throughout the analysis of results, whenever a group of data taken as a whole generates a p-value of .1 or less, the data itself is broken down and analyzed individually, to look for statistical differences between individual categories. In this case, the p-value for the data considering malesÕ and femalesÕ preference for each of the three categories at once is .0754, so the data was broken down to examine individual p-values for the comparisons of males and females choosing the first choice (valuing status among friends or society), males and females choosing the second choice (valuing status among colleagues either in the work force or at school), and males and females choosing the third choice (valuing status within families.) The individual statistics for each category chosen are shown in Table 2 (a,b,and c), Table 3 (a,b, and c) and Table 4 (a,b, and c).
As demonstrated by Graph 1, status is preferred among colleagues the most by both men and women, where nearly 54% of the men surveyed chose that answer as top priority, and about 45% of females surveyed chose that answer as highest valued. According to the p-vales listed in Table 3a, however, this difference is not significant. However, according to the p-values in Table 2a, there is a significant difference between men and women in placing more value on having status among friends or in society. This means that the difference between the number of men who chose this answer (found in question 1 of our survey) as their top priority, and the number of women who chose this as their top priority, is significant enough that it is of great likelihood that the differences are not due to chance alone. Tables 2b., 3b., and 4b. illustrate the raw numbers of men and women who chose each given category as Ònumber 1Ó as compared to choosing one of the other two categories. The ÒExpected ValuesÓ found in Tables 2c., 3c., and 4c. are the numeric values that unbiased probability alone would dictate. These are valuable when comparing them to the actual raw data found in their corresponding Tables 2b., 3b., and 4b. So, for example, in examining the data that compares Sex (Male/Female) and ÒFriends/SocietyÓ (in other words, that compares the number of men and the number of women who find status among friends the most desirable of the given categories), the respected results would be roughly 19 and roughly 22 respectively. However, the actual results were 25 and 16 respectively. This is a relatively large difference, so statistical significance between the two might be expected, which is demonstrated in Table 2a.
Table 5 displays the results of Question 2 on our survey, which was designed to measure the actual magnitude or level of value males and females place on status. A number system was used, in which participants choosing a lower number corresponded to placing greater value on status in their lives, and a higher number corresponded to placing less value on status in their lives. The numbers chosen could range from 1 to 10. Table 5 displays the calculated averages of male answers, and female answers, and illustrates very little difference in the amount of value males and females attribute to status. Both value status to an extremely high extent in *some* category of their lives (evidenced by a chosen number less than 2 in both cases), but on whole, both only moderately value having status in their lives, relative to other things.
Graphs 2a. and 2b. illustrate the percents of females and males respectively, who chose each given category as being the most desirable situation in which to have status. These charts are valuable in offering a comparative look at the differences between the dynamics among men and women regarding the benefits of status they value most. As is evident, a noticeably higher percentage of the females surveyed than the males surveyed, value status for its potential to elicit emotional support. On the other hand, a slightly greater percent of the males surveyed than the females surveyed, valued statusÕs ability to elicit material wealth. Table 6 relays the raw data. Particular categories or traits were counted as Òmost valuedÓ if the participant ranked the category as either (1) most desirable, or (2) second-most desirable.
Tables 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 offer p-values taken of each individual category, comparing the statistical difference between menÕs and womenÕs reasons for desiring status. Statistical significance is shown between men and women in their desire for status in order to attain emotional support, meaning that the differences in amount of women who valued the ability to gain emotional support through status and the amount of men who valued status likewise, is not due to chance alone.
Tables 12a and 12b look at the raw data and statistical analysis of menÕs and womenÕs amount or willingness to sacrifice in order to achieve status. The data suggests that there is virtually no difference between groups of men and groups of womenÕs respective willingnesses to sacrifice; virtually the same percent of the male population and female population would sacrifice something of great importance, while virtually the same percent of the male and female population wouldnÕt sacrifice anything at all to gain status. Table 13a. displays the raw data among men and women and their willingness to harm others to achieve status. Table 13b. presents a p-value of .1048, which pertains to the group of potential responses as a whole. Tables 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18, then, look at statistical summaries of malesÕ and femalesÕ relative willingness to harm others to achieve status, compared using statistics on each answer individually. Statistical significance is shown between male and femaleÕs willingness to make a decision that would increase their status at the risk of someone elseÕs harm. According to the data, males report that they are willing to do so, significantly more often than do women.

Discussion/ Conclusion

According to our analysis, our results suggest that both males and females prefer to have status among their colleagues at work or school over having status among their friends or among their families. However, there is a significant difference in the relative amounts of females who prefer to have status among their friends or within society than in the relative amounts of males. If not valuing status among their cohorts, males are more likely than females to desire status among their friends, whereas females are more likely to hope for status within their families. According to psychobiology, this would make sense because of the femaleÕs theoretical instincts to build strong family ties in order to have assistance in alleviating some of the high cost involved in raising children. Males, on the other hand, would be more likely to curry favor among social groups; jockeying for status amongst their friends and increasing their desirability to mates.
In looking at how much men and women actually value status, (independent of their preferred area of status), surprisingly, there is very little difference between their relative levels of status-value. According to psychobiology, however, weÕd have expected otherwise. It would have been in the interest of the male to have high status to gain mates, but the female ought to be indifferent as to her place in a hierarchy because of the certainty of her having mates. Our results do not support these theories perhaps because of the changes that humans have made socially over time. The needs of the individual in our society today are sharply different than those of the environment in which we evolved. The equal value that men and women are shown to place on status in our survey can be explained by changing needs and social pressures such as the women's' liberation movement.
Following this pattern as well, then, is the suggestion that even within a realm that men and women would actively seek status, there is little difference between the amount of value men place on status in that situation than the amount of value women place. Our results demonstrate that both men and women equally value status as a whole, to a moderate degree, and both equally value status within particular realms, to a very high degree.
Another interesting finding of our study, is that there is little significant difference between men and women in the reasons they seek status. We predicted that men would be more likely to seek status because of its benefit of increasing the odds of gaining material wealth, or would be more likely than women to seek status because of its ability to elicit potential mates. However, there was no statistical difference between men and women in choosing these categories as their top reasons for desiring status; both chose these categories equally. On the other hand, as predicted, there *is* a significant difference between malesÕ and femalesÕ desiring status because of the emotional support it can elicit. According to our study, females are more likely than males to value status because of its rewards of eliciting emotional support. This does make sense, following evolutionary theory. For reasons similar to those that cause females to place a higher value on status in their family, women also value extra emotional support gained from high status. The burden of raising children is a heavy one, and emotional support from others is linked to actual help in other areas. Children require constant attention to become viable members of society, and emotional support for the mother translates to aid in attending to children.
In terms of motivation for acquiring status, according to our data, males and females are equally as unwilling as they are willing to sacrifice matters of importance to them. However, a significant difference showed up between malesÕ and femalesÕ willingness to harm others in order to achieve status. While there is no significant difference between the amounts of men and women who take the extremes in reporting their relative willingness (or lack thereof) in harming others (i.e. choosing Òvery willingÓ or Òvery unwillingÓ) a significant difference shows up between men and women simply reporting a ÒwillingnessÓ to harm someone else in order to achieve status. Our study suggests that, to a moderate extent, males are more likely to be willing to harm someone else to achieve status, than females. However, it is important to note that they are also equally as likely to be unwilling a females. This may, however, reflect a difference in honesty of self-reporting. Perhaps males are simply more willing to admit to their willingness to harm others than females. To improve on this study, perhaps a more story-line-oriented survey could be distributed, which asked participants how they might react in given situations rather than directly asking them to rate their vales of status on a number scale. Perhaps we might get even more trust-worthy responses by not asking the participants to self-rate, but rather, rate them ourselves based on their answers.
In light of the similarities between malesÕ and femalesÕ value placed on status at work in particular, it may be interesting to make a comparative study of how this value has changed over the last century. While this would require dredging up studies from one-hundred years ago, if they can be found it would prove very interesting to see how peopleÕs behaviors and values have changed. It would also be interesting to do a comparative study regarding how differences in perception of status at work in particular plays out between men and women. If women are seeking emotional support in their quest for status, and males are seeking respect from their peers, perhaps this might play a role in their relative motivations for seeking, for example, certain promotions in the work force. Depending on the situation, perhaps more of a drive to succeed at achieving particular promotions will be elicited from one sex over the other in a co-ed work setting, which might be useful to take into consideration when discussing male or female privilege in the workforce.

Literature Review

1. Adler: Individual Psychology in Theories of Personality. Prentice Hall : Upper Saddle, NJ 1996.
2. Gender, Ethnic Status, and Ideological Asymmetry: A Social Dominance Interpretation.
In Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology v. 25 (June '94) p. 194-216.
3. Social Dominance and Orientation, Anti-Egalitarianism and the Politics of Psychology of Gender: An Extension and Cross-Cultural Replication. In European Journal of Social Psychology. V 2000, 30,1 Jan-Feb 41-67
4. Social Dominance Orientation, Hierarchy Attenuators, and Hierarchy Enhancers: Social Dominance Theory and the Criminal Justice System. In Journal of Applied Social Psychology. V 24 (Feb. 15, 1994) p 338-66.
5. Status, Gender, and Non-Verbal Behavior: A Study of Structured Interactions Between Employees of a Company. In Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. V 1999,25,9 Sept. 1082-109.
6. Strayer, F.F. (1980) Social ecology of the pre-school peer group. In W.A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology: Vol 13 Development of Cognition, affect, and social relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu