Carnegie Mellon

The authors argue that high self-monitors may be more sensitive to the status implications of social exchange and more effective in managing their exchange relations to elicit conferrals of status than low self-monitors. In a series of studies, they found that high self-monitors were more accurate in perceiving the status dynamics involved both in a set of fictitious exchange relations and in real relationships involving other members of their social group. Further, high self-monitors elevated their social status among their peers by establishing a reputation as a generous exchange partner. Specifically, they were more likely than low self-monitors to be sought out for help and to refrain from asking others for help. This behavior provides one explanation for why high self-monitors acquire elevated status among their peers--they are more attuned to status dynamics in exchange relations and adapt their behavior in ways that elicit status.

[1]  Francis J. Flynn,et al.  What's good for the goose may not be as good for the gander: the benefits of self-monitoring for men and women in task groups and dyadic conflicts. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[2]  Francis J. Flynn Having an open mind: the impact of openness to experience on interracial attitudes and impression formation. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  Richard P. Larrick,et al.  Social network schemas and the learning of incomplete networks. , 2005, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  S. Gosling,et al.  A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains , 2003 .

[5]  Francis J. Flynn How Much Should I Give and How Often? The Effects of Generosity and Frequency of Favor Exchange on Social Status and Productivity , 2003 .

[6]  Cameron Anderson,et al.  Power, Approach, and Inhibition , 2003 .

[7]  Francis J. Flynn HOW MUCH SHOULD I GIVE AND HOW OFTEN ? THE EFFECTS OF GENEROSITY AND FREQUENCY OF FAVOR EXCHANGE ON SOCIAL STATUS AND PRODUCTIVITY , 2003 .

[8]  B. Malinowski Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea , 2002 .

[9]  W. Swann,et al.  Blirtatiousness: cognitive, behavioral, and physiological consequences of rapid responding. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  Sandra E. Spataro,et al.  Getting to Know You: The Influence of Personality on Impressions and Performance of Demographically Different People in Organizations , 2001 .

[11]  C Anderson,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Who Attains Social Status ? Effects of Personality and Physical Attractiveness in Social Groups , 2004 .

[12]  T. Santora What's Good for the Goose , 2001 .

[13]  Ajay Mehra,et al.  The Social Networks of High and Low Self-Monitors: Implications for Workplace Performance , 2001 .

[14]  R. Sabatelli The Social Psychology of Groups , 2000 .

[15]  S. Gangestad,et al.  Self-Monitoring : Appraisal and Reappraisal , 2001 .

[16]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Whether close or far: Social distance effects on perceived balance in friendship networks , 1999 .

[17]  Y Shoda,et al.  Reconciling processing dynamics and personality dispositions. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

[18]  Lee,et al.  When the Going Gets Tough, Do the Tough Ask for Help? Help Seeking and Power Motivation in Organizations. , 1997, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[19]  O. John,et al.  On the nature of self-monitoring: construct explication with Q-sort ratings. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Cognitive inconsistencies and non-symmetric friendship , 1996 .

[21]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Do we know how much people like one another? , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[23]  D. Day,et al.  Do Chameleons Get Ahead? The Effects of Self-Monitoring on Managerial Careers , 1994 .

[24]  D. Krackhardt,et al.  Bringing the Individual Back in: A Structural Analysis of the Internal Market for Reputation in Organizations , 1994 .

[25]  S. Fiske Social cognition and social perception. , 1993, Annual review of psychology.

[26]  B. Wegener Concepts and Measurement of Prestige , 1992 .

[27]  C. Ridgeway,et al.  The Social Construction of Status Value: Gender and Other Nominal Characteristics , 1991 .

[28]  Stephen J. Zaccaro,et al.  Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in leadership: An investigation of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. , 1991 .

[29]  James J. Connolly,et al.  Personality, social skills, and psychopathology : an individual differences approach , 1991 .

[30]  Joyce Hogan,et al.  Personality and Status , 1991 .

[31]  D. Krackhardt Assessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition, and power in organizations. , 1990 .

[32]  William Ickes,et al.  Naturalistic Social Cognition: Empathic Accuracy in Mixed-Sex Dyads , 1990 .

[33]  Mark A. Costanzo,et al.  Interperting the expressive behavior of others: The Interpersonal Perception Task , 1989 .

[34]  M. Snyder,et al.  Understanding Consumer Decision‐Making Processes: The Role of Form and Function In Product Evaluation1 , 1989 .

[35]  P. Burke Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste , 1989 .

[36]  David Krackhardt,et al.  Cognitive social structures , 1987 .

[37]  Kenneth G. DeBono Investigating the social-adjustive and value-expressive functions of attitudes: Implications for persuasion processes. , 1987 .

[38]  D. Funder,et al.  On the several facets of personality assessment: The case of social acuity. , 1986, Journal of personality.

[39]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[40]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Appeals to image and claims about quality: Understanding the psychology of advertising. , 1985 .

[41]  J. Simpson,et al.  Self-monitoring and dating relationships , 1984 .

[42]  R. Lennox,et al.  Revision of the self-monitoring scale. , 1984, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[43]  M. R. Leippe,et al.  Victimization, self-monitoring, and eyewitness identification. , 1984 .

[44]  H. Garland,et al.  Relationship Between Self-Monitoring and Leader Emergence Across Two Task Situations. , 1979 .

[45]  Mark Snyder,et al.  Persons, situations, and the control of social behavior , 1975 .

[46]  M. Snyder Self-monitoring of expressive behavior. , 1974 .

[47]  Harold Sigall,et al.  Radiating beauty: Effects of having a physically attractive partner on person perception. , 1973 .

[48]  E. Goffman Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order , 1971 .

[49]  M. Mauss The gift : Forms and functions of exchange in Archaic Societies / Marcel Mauss , 2020 .

[50]  R. Zajonc,et al.  Structural bias and generalization in the learning of social structures1 , 1969 .

[51]  R. Weiss Ingratiation. A social psychological analysis , 1967 .

[52]  R. Zajonc,et al.  THE LEARNING OF BALANCED AND UNBALANCED SOCIAL STRUCTURES. , 1965, Journal of personality.

[53]  De Soto Cb,et al.  Learning a social structure. , 1960 .

[54]  A. Gouldner THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[55]  C. D. De Soto,et al.  Learning a social structure. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[56]  R. Mann A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. , 1959 .

[57]  G. C. Homans,et al.  Social Behavior as Exchange , 1958, American Journal of Sociology.

[58]  P. Blau,et al.  The Dynamics of Bureaucracy: A Study of Interpersonal Relations in Two Government Agencies. , 1956 .

[59]  W. Goldschmidt,et al.  GENERAL AND THEORETICAL: The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies. Marcel Mauss. Translated by Ian Cunnison. Introduction by E. E. Evans-Pritchard , 1955 .