The nature of status: Navigating the varied approaches to conceptualizing and measuring status

Members of small groups fundamentally desire status as status underpins members' self-concept and dictates behavior in groups. Moreover, group members readily orient and update status perceptions that index the social standing of themselves and other members. Yet, our understanding is obscured by variability in how researchers study status. In the current review, we crystallize knowledge regarding the nature of status by characterizing variability in definitions, measures, and analytic frameworks. We advocate a definition of status that draws together attributes of respect, admiration, and voluntary deference. We also distinguish reputational and relational status operationalizations and address implications pertaining to measurement along with downstream decisions involving data management and analysis. We encourage a deliberate approach to ensure congruency in how status is defined, measured, and analyzed within a research program. This review also guides theory and hypothesis generation regarding how status-related processes may vary based on different forms of status or differing contexts. Distinctions in group members' status naturally arise during group interactions. High status tends to be associated with an array of benefits, such as receiving more respect and attention, enjoying better psychological and physical health, and having greater access to valued resources and opportunities. As such, people fundamentally desire status, vigilantly attend to their own and others' status, and actively pursue status. Status also powerfully influences group functioning. Whereas a consensually formed status hierarchy may provide order and increase coordination, disputes over status rank can undermine cooperation and encourage conflict among group members. Despite the critical role status plays in social interactions, researchers continue to disagree about how status should be defined and studied. Without a consistent definition and a measurement guideline, it is difficult to produce cumulative knowledge regarding when, for whom, and why status is afforded to others, and the consequences of gaining, losing, or threats to one's status. In this review, we advocate a status definition that identifies respect, admiration, and voluntary deference as three essential attributes of status. We also distinguish status that is consensually conferred by a group (i.e., reputational status) from status conferred by a particular group member (i.e., relational status). We conclude this paper by providing a guide of measurement options and data management strategies that are suitable for studying distinctive research questions.