Goode argues that esteem is a curvilinear function of performance, while disesteem stems in part from substandard performance. Disesteem is also greater the more deviant acts one commits and the more disapproved these acts are. Further, performance and deviance may pay off (in esteem and disesteem) at different rates for people of different status. Here we test Goode's predictions in a well-bounded, well-connected subculture with a single central form of activity for which performance quality is clearly measurable. His esteem predictions, which are essential to much of his larger argument, are strongly supported. The results for disesteem lead us to modify his argument. We also investigate the possible role of network size and performance frequency as mechanisms for the translation of performance and deviance into esteem or disesteem.
[1]
James L. Price,et al.
The Study of Turnover.
,
1978
.
[2]
W. J. Goode,et al.
The Celebration of Heroes: Prestige as a Social Control System
,
1978
.
[3]
Paul Humphreys,et al.
Theoretical Consequences of the Status Characteristics Formulation
,
1981,
American Journal of Sociology.
[4]
E.K.F. Lee,et al.
Network sampling in practice: Some second steps
,
1981
.
[5]
J. S. Long,et al.
Cumulative Advantage and Inequality in Science
,
1982
.
[6]
M. D. Pugh,et al.
Neutralizing Sexism in Mixed-Sex Groups: Do Women Have to Be Better Than Men?
,
1983,
American Journal of Sociology.
[7]
T. A. Nosanchuk,et al.
Applied network sampling
,
1983
.