Do magnitudes of difference on status characteristics matter for small group inequalities?

The theory of status characteristics and expectation states (SCT) explains how macro-level dimensions of stratification and specific abilities come to organize small group processes. The theory argues that people generate expectation states for each other based on relative standings on dimensions of stratification such that people with the more culturally valued states of the characteristics have higher expectations. Subsequently social influence, participation rates and evaluations of participation are purported to be directly related to expectation states. The result of this process is that large-scale inequalities are perpetuated in small group interactions, and individuals higher on abilities receive systematic advantages in small groups. SCT has received substantial experimental support for over 40years. However, the theory assumes that only states of relatively high and relatively low matter. That is, the theory and its applications assume that the magnitude of difference separating individuals on a dimension of stratification or ability is irrelevant. Recently, though, extensions to both the theory and its mathematics have been introduced that allow the magnitude of difference to be incorporated into the theory's predictions, supposedly yielding more precise predictions. This paper offers an experimental test of these procedures, showing that including the magnitude of difference into the theoretical predictions yields more precise estimates that explain more status-based inequalities.