| Respondent young–interviewer old (reference respondent and interviewer both young) . | Respondent old–interviewer young (reference respondent and interviewer both old) . | |
|---|---|---|
| Power relations: In-group loyalty | Young respondent makes him/herself appear less socially dominant (negative effect—change away from old) | Old respondent makes him/herself appear more socially dominant (positive effect—change away from young) |
| Power relations: Social acquiescence | Young respondent conforms to socially dominant old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent does not conform to young (nonsocially dominant) interviewer’s expected view (no change) |
| Social desirability: Social distance | Young respondent conforms to old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent conforms to young interviewer’s expected view (negative effect—change towards young) |
| Respondent young–interviewer old (reference respondent and interviewer both young) . | Respondent old–interviewer young (reference respondent and interviewer both old) . | |
|---|---|---|
| Power relations: In-group loyalty | Young respondent makes him/herself appear less socially dominant (negative effect—change away from old) | Old respondent makes him/herself appear more socially dominant (positive effect—change away from young) |
| Power relations: Social acquiescence | Young respondent conforms to socially dominant old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent does not conform to young (nonsocially dominant) interviewer’s expected view (no change) |
| Social desirability: Social distance | Young respondent conforms to old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent conforms to young interviewer’s expected view (negative effect—change towards young) |
| Respondent young–interviewer old (reference respondent and interviewer both young) . | Respondent old–interviewer young (reference respondent and interviewer both old) . | |
|---|---|---|
| Power relations: In-group loyalty | Young respondent makes him/herself appear less socially dominant (negative effect—change away from old) | Old respondent makes him/herself appear more socially dominant (positive effect—change away from young) |
| Power relations: Social acquiescence | Young respondent conforms to socially dominant old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent does not conform to young (nonsocially dominant) interviewer’s expected view (no change) |
| Social desirability: Social distance | Young respondent conforms to old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent conforms to young interviewer’s expected view (negative effect—change towards young) |
| Respondent young–interviewer old (reference respondent and interviewer both young) . | Respondent old–interviewer young (reference respondent and interviewer both old) . | |
|---|---|---|
| Power relations: In-group loyalty | Young respondent makes him/herself appear less socially dominant (negative effect—change away from old) | Old respondent makes him/herself appear more socially dominant (positive effect—change away from young) |
| Power relations: Social acquiescence | Young respondent conforms to socially dominant old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent does not conform to young (nonsocially dominant) interviewer’s expected view (no change) |
| Social desirability: Social distance | Young respondent conforms to old interviewer’s expected view (positive effect—change towards old) | Old respondent conforms to young interviewer’s expected view (negative effect—change towards young) |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
