• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Power affects the behavior of people in the workplace. Communication is a prime example of a behavior that can be affected by the level of power that a person holds in an organization. Statements can have both semantic and pragmatic implications. The semantic implication of a statement concerns the literal meaning of the statement, whereas the pragmatic implication of a statement includes the antecedent conditions that led the communicator to make the statement. We hypothesize that high power individuals are more likely to interpret messages semantically, whereas low power individuals are more likely to interpret messages pragmatically. Furthermore, we examine how power level effects an individual's choice to send a message with semantic or pragmatic implications. We believe that low power individuals are more likely to use pragmatic messages, and high power individuals are more likely to use semantic messages. Organizational implications for our findings are discussed.

Communication, interpretation, conflict

Abstract:
Four experiments explore the psychological effects that power has on the possessor of power. Recent studies have suggested that power activates the behavioral approach system (Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, in press) and leads directly to action (Galinsky, Gruenfeld, & Magee, 2003). The current research shows that power assists individuals in overcoming natural inhibitions and constraints that exist in the social environment and can lead to disobedience, nonconformity, and even dissonance. Power can thus free a person from internal conflict in some cases (e.g., allowing for the expression of attitudes that don't conform to the pressure from others) and create internal conflict in others (e.g., arousing dissonance and leading to shifts in attitudes). The discussion focuses on how the social consequences of inattention to social constraint can either be prosocial and antisocial.

Power, Conformity, Disobedience

Abstract:
Three experiments demonstrated that the experience of power leads to an illusion of personal control. Regardless of whether power was experientially primed (Experiments 1 and 3) or manipulated through manager-subordinate roles (Experiment 2), it led to perceived control over outcomes that were beyond the reach of the powerholder. Furthermore, this illusory control mediated the influence of power on several self-enhancement and approach-related effects found in the power literature, including optimism (Experiment 2), self-esteem (Experiment 3), and action-orientation (Experiment 3), demonstrating its theoretical importance as a generative cause and driving force behind many of power's far-reaching effects. A fourth experiment ruled out an alternative explanation: that positive mood, rather than illusory control, is at the root of power's effects. The discussion considers implications for existing and future research on the psychology of power, perceived control, and positive illusions.

power, illusory control, action-orientation, self-esteem, optimism, leadership, power and influence