mm51n895A即2 Squeezed in the Middle:The Middle Status Trade Creativity for Focus wahMichcMyDgwidLouts lackhLGacaa h opposed to the top or bo g different n In addition.we f of status loss a of power and s ng山 unlike statu and by ma ve der resufor future problem solving on tasks that require either focusor. Research n the antecedents and outcomes of social status has Classical research on social influence suggests not,purporting and related disciplines (Fiske,2010:Fiske& that ind y,1956:H 961:Kelley Shapiro.1954 003.M ch h who aspires to a t fears dise but udying status 201 zelditch.19)more aentio mple e over lower status some of the studies wereco relational or gr onflated status and power.For example Bartos (1958)simpl when th status,posi and more he early research theorized that middle ure d (Adler,Epel nsecurity (Dittes 5 tatus acere in a straiehtforward linear fashion? eical pn s that was assumed to be triggered by middle hus. midd rchy or do they face a unique set of pr res at the middle tngger a sense of insecurity and a fea ofrejecefiom estigating how middle status imne his article should he addressed to Michell Busine status loss-and by measuring it directly.Elucidating the under-Squeezed in the Middle: The Middle Status Trade Creativity for Focus Michelle M. Duguid Washington University in Saint Louis Jack A. Goncalo Cornell University Classical research on social influence suggested that people are the most conforming in the middle of a status hierarchy as opposed to the top or bottom. Yet this promising line of research was abandoned before the psychological mechanism behind middle-status conformity had been identified. Moving beyond the early focus on conformity, we propose that the threat of status loss may make those with middle status more wary of advancing creative solutions in fear that they will be evaluated negatively. Using different manipulations of status and measures of creativity, we found that when being evaluated, middle-status individuals were less creative than either high-status or low-status individuals (Studies 1 and 2). In addition, we found that anxiety at the prospect of status loss also caused individuals with middle status to narrow their focus of attention and to think more convergently (Study 3). We delineate the consequences of power and status both theoretically and empirically by showing that, unlike status, the relationship between power and creativity is positive and linear (Study 4). By both measuring status (Studies 2 and 3) and by manipulating it directly (Study 5), we demonstrate that the threat of status loss explains the consequences of middle status. Finally, we discuss the theoretical implications of our results for future research on status and problem solving on tasks that require either focus or flexibility. Keywords: status, creativity, conformity, convergent thinking Research on the antecedents and outcomes of social status has become one of the most vibrant streams of research in social psychology and related disciplines (Fiske, 2010; Fiske & Berdahl, 2007; Hall, Coats, & LeBeau, 2005; Keltner, Gruenfeld, & An￾derson, 2003; Magee & Galinsky, 2008). Status is defined as the prominence, respect, honor, and influence that individuals enjoy in the eyes of others (Anderson, Srivastava, Beer, Spataro, & Chat￾man, 2006). A reasonable and widely held assumption in the status literature is that most individuals strive to attain status because of the many benefits that accrue as one moves up the status hierarchy (Fan & Gruenfeld, 1998; Podolny, 1993; Ridgeway & Walker, 1995; Sivanathan & Pettit, 2010). Those attaining higher status are given more control over group decisions (Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980), more attention and influence over lower status group members (Ridgeway & Walker, 1995), more choice over whom to collaborate with (Hardy & Van Vugt, 2006), and more credit when those collaborations result in successful outcomes (Fan & Gruenfeld, 1998; Podolny, 1993). Presumably all of these psychological and material benefits of status should also make individuals more confident and more self-assured (Adler, Epel, Castellazzo, & Ickovics, 2000), but do the benefits of acquiring status accrue in a straightforward, linear fashion? Classical research on social influence suggests not, purporting instead that individuals with middle status are in fact more inse￾cure and more conforming than those with either high or low status (Dittes & Kelley, 1956; Homans, 1961; Kelley & Shapiro, 1954). Homans (1961, p. 357) dubbed this curvilinear effect “middle status conservatism,” which, he argued, “reflects the anxiety ex￾perienced by one who aspires to a social station but fears disen￾franchisement.” The early findings pointing to middle-status con￾formity were promising, but the methodological approaches to studying status were imprecise, the results somewhat inconsistent, and the line of research abandoned before the phenomenon was clearly understood (Homans, 1961; Phillips & Zuckerman, 2001). For example, some of the studies were correlational or qualitative (e.g., Blau, 1955), leaving open the possibility that more conform￾ing individuals seek out middle-status positions. Other studies conflated status and power. For example, Bartos (1958) simply used existing leadership positions as proxies for status, positions that may have also included power over others. Moreover, though the early research theorized that middle-status conformity stems from a sense of insecurity (Dittes & Kelley, 1956; Kelley & Shapiro, 1954), there was no direct evidence to corroborate the psychological process that was assumed to be triggered by middle status. Thus, an important question remains— do middle-status individuals gain confidence having escaped the bottom of the hierarchy or do they face a unique set of pressures at the middle that trigger a sense of insecurity and a fear of rejection? In the current research, we attempt to address this question by investigating how middle status impacts creative task performance. We do so with two important objectives in mind. First, we build on the early research on middle-status conformity by specifying the psychological process underlying this phenomenon—the threat of status loss—and by measuring it directly. Elucidating the under￾Michelle M. Duguid, Department of Organizational Behavior, Olin Business School, Washington University in Saint Louis; Jack A. Goncalo, Department of Organizational Behavior, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michelle M. Duguid, Olin Business School, Washington University in Saint Louis, 1 Brookings Drive, Campus Box 1156, Saint Louis, MO 63130. E-mail: duguid@wustl.edu This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology © 2015 American Psychological Association 2015, Vol. 109, No. 9, 000 0022-3514/15/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0039569 1