Who influences lower-status individuals more: People of higher-status outgroups or people of their lower-status ingroup? Examining the difference between matters of opinion and matters of fact

IF 3.2 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Vincenz Frey , Andreas Flache , Dieko Bakker , Michael Mäs
{"title":"Who influences lower-status individuals more: People of higher-status outgroups or people of their lower-status ingroup? Examining the difference between matters of opinion and matters of fact","authors":"Vincenz Frey ,&nbsp;Andreas Flache ,&nbsp;Dieko Bakker ,&nbsp;Michael Mäs","doi":"10.1016/j.ssresearch.2024.103060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>People are influenced by members of high-status groups and members of their ingroup. These principles of “status orientation” and “ingroup orientation” can imply opposing forces for people of lower status. Are lower-status individuals more influenced by members of higher-status outgroups or by members of their lower-status ingroup? Engaging status characteristics theory and self-categorization theory, we predict that status orientation is relatively stronger on questions about facts, which have an objectively correct answer, whereas ingroup orientation is stronger when it comes to ‘opinion questions’ that have no objectively correct answer. Results of an online survey experiment confirm that on factual questions, less-educated individuals are more strongly influenced by highly-educated outgroup individuals than by less-educated ingroup individuals. On opinion questions, we observe relatively weaker status orientation, with status orientation and ingroup orientation being about equally strong. These findings suggest that it is harder to reach societal consensus on opinion questions than on factual questions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48338,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Research","volume":"123 ","pages":"Article 103060"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X24000826/pdfft?md5=54425992a9d91d86f4d91911e91a9eba&pid=1-s2.0-S0049089X24000826-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X24000826","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People are influenced by members of high-status groups and members of their ingroup. These principles of “status orientation” and “ingroup orientation” can imply opposing forces for people of lower status. Are lower-status individuals more influenced by members of higher-status outgroups or by members of their lower-status ingroup? Engaging status characteristics theory and self-categorization theory, we predict that status orientation is relatively stronger on questions about facts, which have an objectively correct answer, whereas ingroup orientation is stronger when it comes to ‘opinion questions’ that have no objectively correct answer. Results of an online survey experiment confirm that on factual questions, less-educated individuals are more strongly influenced by highly-educated outgroup individuals than by less-educated ingroup individuals. On opinion questions, we observe relatively weaker status orientation, with status orientation and ingroup orientation being about equally strong. These findings suggest that it is harder to reach societal consensus on opinion questions than on factual questions.

谁对地位较低的人影响更大?是地位较高的外群体还是地位较低的内群体?研究观点问题与事实问题之间的区别
人们会受到高地位群体成员及其内群体成员的影响。这些 "地位取向 "和 "内群体取向 "原则对于地位较低的人来说可能意味着相反的力量。地位较低的人受地位较高的外群体成员的影响更大,还是受地位较低的内群体成员的影响更大?根据地位特征理论和自我归类理论,我们预测,在有客观正确答案的事实问题上,地位导向相对更强,而在没有客观正确答案的 "观点问题 "上,群体导向则更强。一项在线调查实验的结果证实,在事实问题上,受教育程度较低的个体受受教育程度较高的外群体个体的影响比受教育程度较低的内群体个体的影响更大。在观点问题上,我们观察到地位导向相对较弱,地位导向和内群体导向大致相当。这些发现表明,与事实性问题相比,在观点性问题上更难达成社会共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
65 days
期刊介绍: Social Science Research publishes papers devoted to quantitative social science research and methodology. The journal features articles that illustrate the use of quantitative methods in the empirical solution of substantive problems, and emphasizes those concerned with issues or methods that cut across traditional disciplinary lines. Special attention is given to methods that have been used by only one particular social science discipline, but that may have application to a broader range of areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信