IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v6y2013i02p149-152_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Not Just Intergroup: The Role of Status Within Groups in the Sandusky Scandal

Author

Listed:
  • Bailey, Sarah F.
  • Ferguson, Amanda J.

Abstract

The series of events in the 2011 Penn State sexual abuse scandal were tumultuous and complex. Alderfer's (2013) focal article on the group-level phenomena surrounding the scandal provides a unique lens to view these events. However, questions remain about how relationships both within and between the groups involved in the scandal resulted in these outcomes. In particular, why did members of groups within Penn State fail to act, whereas people who belonged to other social groups took action? In short, we agree that group and intergroup boundaries were important in this situation, but would like to further elaborate on the underlying mechanisms behind their significance. Beyond the fact that individuals belonged to different groups, what aspects of group dynamics explain the differences in their perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors in this scandal?

Suggested Citation

  • Bailey, Sarah F. & Ferguson, Amanda J., 2013. "Not Just Intergroup: The Role of Status Within Groups in the Sandusky Scandal," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 149-152, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:6:y:2013:i:02:p:149-152_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942600005186/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:6:y:2013:i:02:p:149-152_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.