Richard Nisbitt and Dov Cohen described the American South as having a Culture of Honor. Historically, whether or not you plowed or herded depended upon the contours of where you lived - hilly and grassy contours invited herders. Flat and wet landscapes invited farmers. Those who herded, these authors argued, were more sensitive to things that might harm livestock and therefore developed a greater cultural willingness towards hostility or violence.
These conclusions are contested by others, such as PJ Henry and Caroline Zink, each of whom in independent studies conclude that a person's status is the most important aspect of how conflict erupts. Nobel Laureate economist John Harsanyi agrees, "apart from economic payoffs, social status seems to be the most important incentive and motivating force of social behavior."
Henry's most recent paper argues that violence erupts due to perceived differences in social status - there's nothing about herding or farming that inherently evokes more or less aggression. Zink's research affirms this view both behaviorally and neurologically (via brain scans). Both these scholars confirm Harsanyi's view that economics plays a huge role in determining social status.
The Great Recession is eroding the perceived social status of our world's talent. I know from personal conversation with some of these folks that such a sense of loss has occurred. It erodes faster when talent loses income and their colleagues escape the recession's scythe.
On a less recession oriented note, David Rock, CEO of an international coaching and consulting firm, finds, "many everyday conversations devolve into arguments driven by a status threat, a desire to not be perceived as less than another." In an interesting article he proposes a method to mediate these types of problems.
Comments