Abstract
Three studies explored the relationship between power and the perception of others in terms of agency and communion. In Study 1, participants taking a manager perspective were more interested in the agency of their future employee than those asked to take a subordinate perspective were in the agency of their future employer. Moreover, they showed more interest in the agency than in the communion of their future employee. Study 2 extended these findings to perceptions of others unrelated to the context of work. In Study 3, participants taking the manager perspective favored agency traits in their employee more than those taking the subordinate perspective favored agency in their employer. This effect was mediated by an increased task orientation among those in positions of greater relative power. Using two manipulations and three dependent measures, power was found to enhance the focus on the agency dimension across the three studies, mediated by increases in orientation to tasks versus relationships.
References
2011). The bigger one of the “Big Two”? Preferential processing of communal information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 935–948.
(2008). Toward an operationalization of the fundamental dimensions of agency and communion: Trait content ratings in five countries considering valence and frequency of word occurrence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1202–1217. doi 10.1002/ejsp.575
(2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 751–763. doi 10.1037/0022-3514.93. 5.751
(2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 511–536. doi 10.1002/ejsp.324
(1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
(1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319–333.
(2009). Illusory control. A generative force behind power’s far-reaching effects. Psychological Science, 20, 502–508. doi 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02311.x
(1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628.
(2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11, 77–83.
(2008). How goal instrumentality shapes relationship evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 319–337. doi 10.1037/0022-3514.95.2.319
(1959). The bases of social power. In , Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
(2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 453–466.
(2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17, 1068–1074. doi 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01824.x
(1998). Why’s my boss always holding me down? A meta-analysis of power effects on performance evaluations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2, 184–195.
(2000). Power can bias impression processes: Stereotyping subordinates by default and by design. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 227–256.
(2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 111–127. doi 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.111
(2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913.
(2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265–284. doi 10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.265
(1976). Metamorphic effects of power. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 127–135.
(2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variables effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104.
(2007). Power, propensity to negotiate, and moving first in competitive interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 200–212. doi 10.1177/0146167206294413
(2001). When power does not corrupt: Superior individuation processes among powerful perceivers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 549–565. doi 10.1037//0022-3514.81.4.549
(1992). Evaluative meanings of adjectives in vitro and in context: Some theoretical implications and practical consequences of positive negative asymmetry and behavioral-adaptive concepts of evaluation. Psychologia Belgica, 32, 211–231.
(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717–731.
(2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209–233. doi 10.1037/a0020141
(2008). Nonconscious effects of power on basic approach and avoidance tendencies. Social Cognition, 26, 1–24.
(2008). Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psychological Science, 19, 441–447. doi 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02107.x
(2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 578–596. doi 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578
(1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173–180. doi 10.1207/s15327906mbr2502_4
(1984). When are social judgments made? Evidence for the spontaneousness of trait inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 237–252.
(1985). How automatic are social judgments? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 904–917.
(1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Construing actions in terms of competence or morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 222–232.
(2010). Sprawczoś i wspólnotowoś. Podstawowe wymiary spostrzegania spojecznego [
(Agency and Communion. The primary dimensions of social perceptions ]. Sopot: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.2008). The primacy of communion over agency and its reversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1139–1147. doi 10.1002/ejsp.549
(in press ). Self-esteem is dominated by agentic over communal information. European Journal of Social Psychology.2007). Power influences self-esteem. Social Cognition, 25, 510–532.
(