Changing of the guards: Status dynamics and innovation in American TV shows, 1956–2010

Erez Aharon Marantz*, Gino Cattani

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Researchers have advanced two opposing accounts of the relationship between status and cultural innovation. We aim to reconcile these views – and their conflicting findings that either high- or low-status cultural producers are more likely to innovate – by adopting a dynamic view of status. We argue that changes in status – at the individual and the field level – affect the relationship between status and innovation. Focusing on the national American television industry over the period 1956–2010, we found that increases and decreases in producers’ status moderated the effect of their current status on the innovativeness of their shows. We also found that the degree of instability in the overall status hierarchy of producers conditioned the impact of status on show innovativeness. When the status hierarchy was relatively stable, high-status producers tended to create more innovative shows than low-status producers. Greater levels of instability, however, decreased the show innovativeness of high-status producers but increased that of low-status producers. By exposing the pressures and opportunities that cultural producers experience as a result of changes in both their status and the status hierarchy, we reveal that the relationship between status and innovation is more nuanced than prior studies suggested.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101859
JournalPoetics
Volume102
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2024

Funding

FundersFunder number
Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation

    Keywords

    • Cultural fields
    • Innovation
    • Social networks
    • Status
    • Status dynamics
    • Television
    • Topic modeling

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Changing of the guards: Status dynamics and innovation in American TV shows, 1956–2010'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this