The self-regulatory and interpersonal consequences of the construal of power
Final Report Abstract
Public discussions often question whether those high in power only recognize their opportunity to pursue goals independently—or whether they also acknowledge their responsibility. Indeed, prior work suggests that social power (i.e., asymmetric control over resources) can lead to different, often quite contradictory outcomes that may entail either more or less sensitivity of the powerful towards others (e.g., their followers). The present project targeted the role of powerholders’ construal (i.e., appraisal) of power in explaining these differential effects. Powerholders can construe power as an opportunity to “freely make things happen”, and as a responsibility to “take care of things” that others may not be able to do. We assumed that how powerholders construe power affects their sensitivity towards others, potentially via activating different modes of self-regulation. Across studies, we manipulated or measured power construal (as opportunity or responsibility) and assessed its effects on indicators of sensitivity towards others (e.g., other-oriented decision-making, leadership behavior, unfairness sensitivity). Though the experimental studies did not provide evidence for this prediction, we found correlational and longitudinal evidence that how leaders construe their power predicts leadership behavior (as indicator of sensitivity) across time; moreover, perceived responsibility is related to a stronger self-regulatory mode of assessment (“do things right”) and perceived opportunity is related to a stronger self-regulatory mode of locomotion (“just do it”). Furthermore, our findings highlighted the relevance of the situational (social) context in producing differences in construal of power: Powerholders more readily recognized their responsibility (1) when they strongly (vs. weakly) identified with the group to which also those low in power belonged; and (2) when they expected to personally meet those lower in power (rather than only expected to have virtual contact with them). These findings provide useful insights for potential interventions; they also indicate that manipulations of power construal may need to generate relatively realistic contexts to be successful (e.g., not only rely on virtual interactions with those low in power, which is often implemented in the laboratory). Finally, we also tested the role of powerholders’ construal of power (i.e., whether they did acknowledge their responsibility) for other people’s trust in them. Indeed, our findings suggest that powerless people relatively easily seem to infer powerholders’ construal of power from powerholders’ behavior to infer their responsibility and, accordingly, to entrust them also with power over them. To conclude, the research conducted in this project provided substantial evidence that construal of power is an externally valid and relevant concept. The results supported the self-regulatory correlates and the behavioral outcomes of construal of power among leaders over time. Though the experimental approach to investigate outcomes of construal remained inconclusive, the other studies we conducted – in the field, regarding predictors of construal of power, the selfregulatory correlates, and the responses of those low in power – clearly underline the relevance of this line of research. The findings are not only accessible to the research community (also in form of theoretical reviews), but were also communicated in blog posts, interviews, and applied articles. Doing so, this project highlighted the relevance to consider the way powerholders construe their power to better understand the consequences and correlates of power. https://www.wissensdialoge.de/verantwortung_als_stress/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/social-climates/202011/why-trump-voters-might-have-confidence-in-joe-biden https://www.wiwo.de/my/erfolg/beruf/fuehrung-im-homeofficewer-digital-kommuniziert-fuehlt-sich-weniger-verantwortlich/26023864.html?ticket=ST-28131-7JQHuxwukNMfodjeD7Bo-ap4 https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/jobs/powerleaders.html
Publications
- (2018). Highly identified power-holders feel responsible: The interplay between social identification and social power within groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57, 112-129
Scholl, A., Sassenberg, K., Ellemers, N., Scheepers, D., & de Wit, F.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12225) - (2018). The burden of power: Construing power as responsibility (rather than as opportunity) alters threat-challenge responses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(7), 1024-1038
Scholl, A., de Wit, F., Ellemers, N., Fetterman, A. K., Sassenberg, K., & Scheepers, D.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218757452) - (2020). Out of sight, out of mind: Powerholders feel responsible when anticipating face-to-face, but not digital contact with others. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, Article 106472
Scholl, A., Sassenberg, K., Zapf, B., & Pummerer, L.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106472) - (2020). Responsible power-holders: when and for what the powerful may assume responsibility. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 28-32
Scholl, A.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.011) - (2021). Just do it or do it right? How regulatory mode relates to perceived responsibility and opportunity in collaborations. Personality and Individual Differences, 176, Article 110776
Scholl, A., Wenzler, M., Ellemers, N., Scheepers, D., & Sassenberg, K.
(See online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110776)
