Status Crystallization: A Non-Vertical Dimension of Social Status

TLDR

Recent sociology has moved beyond classical unidimensional vertical hierarchy models, recognizing that older schemes cannot accommodate contemporary findings or theoretical concerns. Critics argue that human group structure consists of multiple parallel vertical hierarchies that are only imperfectly correlated.

Abstract

IN recent years there have been numerous indications that, in the analysis of social stratification, sociology is rapidly outgrowing the classical conceptual schemes inherited from the past. Critically inclined students have come increasingly to recognize the inability of the older schemes to incorporate many of the findings of present day research, or to adapt themselves to newer theoretical concerns. This trend is evident even with respect to such a basic matter as the manner in which the vertical structure of groups is conceived. From Aristotle to Marx to Warner, most social philosophers and social scientists have described the vertical structure of human groups in terms of a single hierarchy in which each member occupies a single position. Different exponents of this traditional scheme have not always agreed regarding the nature or characteristics of this hierarchical structure. Nevertheless, all have shared the common conception of a unidimensional structure. Since Max Weber's day, however, this traditional approach has come to be criticized by a growing number of sociologists, who have argued that the uni-dimensional view is inadequate to describe the complexities of group structure. These critics have maintained that the structure of human groups normally involves the coexistence of a number of parallel vertical hierarchies which usually are imperfectly correlated with one another. If this newer approach is sound, the traditional conception of individual or family