Deference rituals
Deference rituals are social behaviors that reflect the dynamics of power and status among individuals, particularly in contexts where one party holds greater social authority than another. These rituals can manifest in two primary forms: presentational and avoidance. Presentational rituals involve actions such as compliments and minor services aimed at showing respect, common in many cultures, particularly towards elders or figures of authority. Avoidance rituals, on the other hand, are characterized by maintaining social distance, such as refraining from physical contact or using formal titles when addressing someone of higher status.
Historically, deference rituals have been shaped by larger societal structures related to class, race, ethnicity, and gender, often reinforcing power imbalances. For instance, during the 1800s and early 1900s, African American domestic workers utilized avoidance rituals to navigate the expectations of White employers. Despite their seemingly submissive nature, these rituals can also serve as a coping mechanism against discrimination, allowing individuals to preserve a sense of autonomy while navigating unequal power dynamics.
In contemporary settings, such as corporate environments, deference can be a strategic tool for social mobility, indicating sensitivity to peer competition. However, excessive deference can hinder task completion, suggesting that while respect and decorum are essential, a balance must be maintained to foster effective collaboration. Overall, deference rituals illustrate the intricate interplay of power, respect, and social interaction across different contexts.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Deference rituals
Reinforced by larger systems of class, race, ethnicity, and gender, people who lack power are often expected to act deferentially when in the presence of individuals of higher social status. Although the accordance of deference may involve a respectful regard between status equals, when relations are asymmetrical and unequal, people who act deferentially may be yielding to the wishes or opinions of others in an overly obsequious, servile manner because such behavior is expected of them. In some meritocracies, such as the United States military, such behavior is expected and can serve as a function of order. However, more generally, such behavior and particularly such expectations can be an indication of an imbalance of power.
According to the sociologist Erving Goffman in Interaction Ritual (1967), deference rituals can take two forms, presentational and avoidance. Presentational rituals provide guidelines on how a person should act in the presence of another individual by, for example, concretely depicting appreciation through compliments and minor services. Some cultures have expectations of presentational rituals toward elders on the part of young people, for example. Another example would be when citizens prostrate themselves in the presence of royalty. Avoidance rituals are the most common forms of deference between status unequals. They lead to social distance between the recipients of deference and nonrecipients. For example, to avoid skin contact and give the appearance of “whiteness,” African American domestic servants during the 1800s and early 1900s were often expected to wear white gloves when serving White masters or employers. Maintaining proper spatial distance and avoiding the use of a superordinate’s first name are other examples.
Deference does not necessarily involve the blind obedience of authority figures by minority members. Deference rituals can also become sources of control by providing a way to cope with everyday discrimination and degradation. A person who renders deference to another may do so not because of what he or she thinks of that individual personally but in spite of it. When deference is feigned, minority members are able to preserve a sense of inner autonomy and may even insinuate disregard by modifying and exaggerating intonations, pronunciations, and gestures.
As social dynamics changed throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, so did deference rituals. What was once a demonstration of the acknowledgement of status became a way for people to maintain their own status or even climb the hierarchy. In a corporate or business setting, hierarchies exist as indiviuals must earn their positions, often slowly. A study published in 2012 in Administrative Science Quarterly analyzed emails from various corporations and focused on concern for social acceptance. According to the researchers, "Deference indicates sensitivity to peer competition" and is necessary, to an extent, for an individual to move up the hierarchy. But this study also found that an abundance of deference, particularly in flat groups or organizations where employees are of the same status, can present issues in terms of task completion. While maintaining a professional decorum through deference is beneficial for an individual, in order for work to be achieved, a certain hierarchy must exist.
Bibliography
Agha, Asif. Language and Social Relations. Cambridge UP, 2007.
Daigle, Marsha A. “Relations in Public.” Masterplots II: Nonfiction Series, Mar. 1989, pp. 1–4. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lkh&AN=164507164&site=ehost-live. Accessed 7 Nov. 2024.
“The Deference between Us.” UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School, 10 Nov. 2014, www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/news/the-deference-between-us/. Accessed 7 Nov. 2024. Fragale, Alison R., et al. "Appeasing Equals." Administrative Science Quarterly, 2012. doi.org/10.1177/0001839212461439. Accessed 8 Nov. 2024.
Goffman, Erving. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face to Face Behavior. 1967. Transaction, 2005.
Kádár, Dániel Z., and Marcel Bax. Understanding Historical (Im)Politeness : Relational Linguistic Practice Over Time and Across Cultures. Benjamins, 2012.
Ridgeway, Cecilia. "Why Status Matters for Inequality." American Sociological Review 79.1 (2014): 1–16.
Ritterhouse, Jennifer. "The Etiquette of Manners in the Jim Crow South." Manners and Southern History. Ed. Ted Ownby. UP of Mississippi, 2007.
Thomas, Jenny. "Theories of Politeness." Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Routledge, 1995.