Even before 9/11, there has been a long history of attitudes and public policies that were biased against people of Middle East descent in the United States--regardless of whether or not they are Muslim. This research uses Status Characteristics Theory (SCT) and stigma theory to examine whether there is low status or stigma associated with the Muslim religion and Middle Eastern ethnicity in the United States. By doing so, the research expands upon previous studies of stigma to explore the social psychological processes involved during interactions between the stigmatized and non-stigmatized. This study used experimental data, survey data and qualitative data collected from samples of undergraduate students using designs conceptualized specifically for this research. I conducted an experiment and a Web vignette-survey using undergraduate students from a Midwestern university. The findings of the experiment showed that that European American subjects paired with the Middle Eastern female partner not wearing a hijab and the Muslim Middle Eastern female partner wearing a hijab were influenced more and held more positive perceptions of their partners than did the subjects paired with the European American female partner. In contrast, the results of the Web vignette-survey indicate that the European American target applicant is more likely to be selected for the leadership position than either of the Middle Eastern target applicants (with or without hijab). Furthermore, the results of the social distance measures indicate that knowing someone from the Middle East (e.g. previous contact with a Middle Easterner) decreased the likelihood of social distance from the Middle Eastern target with hijab and without hijab across the vignette conditions. This suggests that there might be less of a tendency for individuals who have had personal contact and interacted with people from the Middle East to take the "us versus them" perspective, which is necessary in order to carry out the process of stigmatization.

Over the last fifty years, researchers in Status Characteristics Theory (SCT) have conclusively demonstrated that within task groups, status differences between members influence the emergence of a power and prestige hierarchy within the group. According to the theory, this is accomplished through the activation of stereotypical expectations of group members' abilities. However, relatively little research has directly examined the cognitive process associated with expectation formation. During this same period, scholars within diverse subfields of psychology have suggested that there are two fundamental dimensions along which social judgments are made. These two dimensions have been referred to by various names, including instrumentality and expressivity, agency and communality, and competence and warmth. The most recent exploration of this idea can be found in the field of cognitive science as part of the Stereotype Content Model (SCM). The purpose of the current research is to integrate the basic propositions of SCT with the cognitive process outlined in SCM. In doing so, I hope to situate SCT within an expansive body of existing research, while suggesting a number of potentially useful directions for future research in SCT.

The impact of social influence from others on choices made by subjects and how this influence accumulates was studied by secondary analysis of reported experimental data. To explain this impact a link is proposed between social influence network theory (SINT) and status characteristics theory (SCT). The link formula transforms stay probabilities for different status relationships of subject with one disagreeing other agent into horizontal axis coordinate values while stay probabilities of subject given two disagreeing others are transformed into vertical-axis coordinate values corresponding to the horizontal axis values for further analyses. The results support the utility of the proposed link between the two theories.

No description available.

Legitimacy is a necessary precondition for a well-functioning judicial system and it can be achieved in a variety of ways. One way of achieving legitimacy, that the Swedish legislator has chosen, is to constitute a system where lay judges work alongside professional judges in the Swedish courts. Lay participation in the courts are thought to fulfill many purposes and one of them is that they are expected to add new knowledge and additional perspectives to the courts. In other words, the Swedish legislator expect the lay judges to have opinions that, if not contrast then at least, complement the opinions of the professional judge. Nevertheless, previous research on Swedish judgements has found that the four members of the court are completely unanimous in about 95% of the judgments in criminal matters that the Swedish district courts delivers. By conducting a survey study this thesis shows that Swedish lay judges and professional judges has differing opinions in a number of matters that, according to the focal concerns theory, influence their sentencing decisions. The results of the study also show that lay judges, in comparison to the professional judges, are more prone to advocate for imprisonment if the perpetrator is deemed guilty. Furthermore, by combining earlier research and theories on the subject, the thesis proposes an explanation to why such a high level of consensus can be observed in the delivered judgements. Lastly, the thesis discusses what implications the study’s results have on the arguments that the Swedish legislator use to justify Sweden’s system of lay judges.

This study examines the identity work strategies that men students in nursing, elementary education, and social work programs employ in order to manage and assert their masculinity in the face of negative gender assessment, as well as the identity work involved in verifying their professional identities. It also examines the perceived benefits and disadvantages that men experience as numerical minorities in their fields of study. Interviews with 12 men students majoring in these disciplines reveal that while men do perceive disadvantages as men in these educational spheres, they believe that the advantages and benefits they enjoy in the form of special treatment, recognition, and access to opportunity far outweigh them. A key perceived disadvantage is the ongoing challenges they face to their social identity as men and their role identity as rising professionals. These men employ identifiable identity work strategies for doing masculinity; some of which have implications for gender equality in the educational setting, as well as in on-site training (i.e., workplace) settings as well. This study contributes to an understanding of how men verify contradictory identities, and how gender shapes, privileges, and constrains their lives. In addition, it builds on extant literature focusing on men's experiences in higher education as they prepare for careers in gender-nontraditional occupations. / Ph. D.