Mapping the Western World

This topic submitted by Alison Vasquez, Michael Forrester, Lene Martin at 1:29 am on 3/1/01. Additions were last made on Friday, April 6, 2001. Section: Myers.

Michael Forrester
Lene Martin
Allison Vasquez
Natural Systems II
WCP 222
Chris Myers
Project Proposal

“Marvin and Joe never got along well, but that was because
Marvin regarded Joe as an extraterrestrial invader and Joe
regarded Marvin as a nut.”

Humans are social animals. Being social animals, we have developed a complex
social structure, or hierarchy, under which every member must live. Whether or not the
community accepts a person may not be a matter of life or death (any more), but there are
still serious consequences of being regarded as an outcast, as there are also many important
beneficial consequences as being seen as having a place higher up on the social ladder.
The purpose of our project is to create a map or scale of the social structure that
exists in the Western College Program of Miami University in order to prove the following
hypothesis:
Modern society and culture have taught individuals to value themselves as ‘higher’
on the social scale than the rest of their community (i.e. society) values them.
In other words, people think that they are better than they really are.
It will be interesting to see where people put themselves on the scale as opposed to
where they actually “are”, and where the community which they know and love places
them.
The hierarchy scale we will construct will seek to uncover if Western Campus lives
up to its famous ideals of acceptance, diversity, intelligence and enlightenment, or if it is a
society like any other, driven by the rules of ‘survival of the fittest’.
Testing the hypothesis based on the constructed scale will enable us to predict how
society and American culture promote the idea of Self Importance; it is believed that the
society itself directs the individual toward the idea that they have higher standing in the
community than they actually possess. The results of any discrepancies will be able to
bring our questions into a cultural context.
It is felt that the college atmosphere is the ideal environment to explore this topic
because the influence of an ‘outside’ society is present in some respects- experiences in
home towns, family and ethnic ties, outside media- is felt in smaller, more intimate societal
constructs- classes, dorm life, social groupings. In addition, since Western is an even
smaller society, the testing of its occupants will not be too difficult and the results will prove
useful to the Western environment and to the future of Interdisciplinary studies.
By investigating and determining the social hierarchy of a society, a heightened
understanding of its people and their nature results, and the ensured success of a society
depends upon the understanding of its own inner structures.

Our materials are to be kept at a minimum-we will need surveys and test subjects.
Our methods of testing our hypothesis will go in stages of surveys. The first survey
will consist of lists of attributes (such as respectful, intelligent, good looking) and
instructions for each list. The instructions will be to rank, within each list, which attribute
is most closely matches the societal stereotype we want defined. For example, one list will
have instructions stating that the person surveyed must rank a list of attributes that are
most admired by the Western community, one being the most admired. There will be
multiple lists on each survey- one for which attributes are most personally admired in
members of the opposite sex, then one of the same sex, then one that asks which are most
admired in by the Western Community as a whole, then which attributes are least
personally desired in members of the opposite sex, then members of the same sex, then
which are expected to be least desired by the Western community. For the positive lists,
each listing of attributes will be the same, and for the negative lists, each listing will be the
same. On each survey the participant will check either male or female.
After the surveys are completed, we will assign a numerical value to each attribute
depending on the average number it was rated in the surveys. Once that is done, the top
five from each set will be totaled and a point scale will be determined.
The next set of surveys will consist of gender definition and a chance to rate oneself
within the scale previously mentioned. Then the participant will be asked to list their top
five qualities (from our pre-set lists). The surveys will be collected, the ‘top fives’ will be
totaled (for each attribute has a value from the earlier surveys) and then the ‘top fives’
totals will be compared to how the participant ranked himself on our scale. The results of
most interests, of course, will be the differences (if any) between where the participant
rated himself and the total of his attributes.

Resources
Conway, Michael. “A Status Account of Gender Stereotypes: Beyond Communality and
Agency”. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research. August 2000.
Galliher, Renee V. “Power and Psychological Well-Being in Late Adolescent Romantic
Relationships”. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research. May 2000.
Lubinski, David. “Scientific and Social Significance of Assessing Individual Differences:
Sinking Shafts at a few Critical Points”. Annual Review of Psychology. Annual
2000.
Macrae, C. Neil. “Social Cognition: Thinking Categorically About Others”. Annual
Review of Psychology. Annual 2000.
Wood, Wendy. “Attitude Change”. Annual Review of Psychology. Annual, 2000.

Time Line
Week 8 Submit Proposal
Week 9 Decide on attributes for each list/ Hand out a few ‘test surveys’ Week
10/11/12 Survey, survey, survey
Week 13/14 Study results
Week 15/17 Write final project paper

Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu