This dissertation examines whether there are unintended consequences that emerge from status interventions in task groups in relation to cohesion and solidarity. Past theorists have argued that inconsistent status structures produce weaker levels of cohesion and solidarity in comparison to consistent status structures. To contextualize the issue of group processes as they relate to public policy, I first introduce the complexity framework for public policy and then outline the history of group processes and the concept of solidarity. Despite centuries noting the complexity of group processes and their implications, policymakers remain myopically focused on either individual responsibility or social structure as the root of social inequality. After providing a theoretical overview, I then proceed to discuss the procedure of the study more in-depth. Data come from an online experiment involving mixed-sex dyads interacting in one of three conditions. Participants individually completed an ambiguous problem-solving task and then worked together over Zoom audio to form a group decision. In the three conditions, participants were either given no performance feedback before the problem-solving task or were informed the male or the female participant performed better on a pre-test related to the task. The conversations were recorded and analyzed using measures related to paraverbal synchronization and accommodation. In terms of self-reported cohesion, there appeared to be a difference, albeit a weak one, in only the inconsistent-status condition, with female participants reporting higher levels of cohesion in comparison to males. However, in terms of solidarity, there was no significant difference between the conditions. Although inconsistent status structures were associated with weaker perceptions of cohesion, it did not appear to impact solidarity like theorists have suggested. Status structures do not appear to impact group solidarity. The nature of group membership in conjunction with status consistency/inconsistency may produce the significant differences in solidarity that theorists have suggested. To date, there has been little empirical examination of how status consistency affects cohesion and solidarity. Relatedly, the current study advances the research on vocal accommodation by analyzing status and solidarity simultaneously. The implications of the findings on status interventions for public policy, in particular the nature of feasibility strategies, are discussed in detail at the end.