2017/12/21 by Mary-Hunter McDonnell, Mary‐Hunter McDonnell, Brayden G King · 96 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Psychology · Social Sciences · #Corruption and Economic Development #Economics #Law #Law and economics #Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems #Liability #Occupational prestige #Order (exchange) #Political science #Prestige #Psychology #Punishment (psychology) #Regulation and Compliance Studies #Reputation #Social psychology #Sociology #Work (physics)
paper · open access · doi:10.1177/0003122417747289
published in American Sociological Review 83(1), 61-87 (SAGE Publishing)
openalex publication_date 2017/12/21 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/04
This article explores the mechanisms by which corporate prestige produces distorted legal outcomes. Drawing on social psychological theories of status, we suggest that prestige influences audience evaluations by shaping expectations, and that its effect will differ depending on whether a firm’s blameworthiness has been firmly established. We empirically analyze a unique database of more than 500 employment discrimination suits brought between 1998 and 2008. We find that prestige is associated with a decreased likelihood of being found liable (suggesting a halo effect in assessments of blameworthiness), but with more severe punishments among organizations that are found liable (suggesting a halo tax in administrations of punishment). Our analysis allows us to reconcile two ostensibly contradictory bodies of work on how organizational prestige affects audience evaluations by showing that prestige can be both a benefit and a liability, depending on whether an organization’s blameworthiness has been firmly established.