The authors studied tendencies to change power differences with others in hierarchically structured groups. Specifically, they contrasted predictions from two theories based on a power motive approach that have recently inspired power dynamics research. Social comparison theory predicts that people want to be somewhat more powerful than comparison others. A competing prediction from power distance theory is that people are more inclined to further increase their power, the more power they have already. In an experiment, 79 students participated in a decision-making task in a hierarchical group. They advised their subordinates and received advice from their superiors. Subsequently, they indicated their preferred changes in power differences. Social comparison theory was mostly supported: Participants mainly wanted slight power superiority over comparison others. The discussion focuses on implications for various theories in the field, such as expectation states theory, and on understanding behavior aimed at improving or securing power positions in hierarchical groups.
Anderson, C.A., & Bushman, B.J. (1997). External validity of “trivial” experiments: The case of laboratory aggression. Review of GeneralPsychology , 1, 19-41.
2.
Berger, J., Ridgeway, C.L., Fisek, M.H., & Norman, R.Z. (1998). The legitimation and delegitimation of power and prestige orders. American Sociological Review, 63, 379-405.
3.
Brockner, J., & Wiesenfeld, B.M. (1996). An integrative framework for explaining reactions to decisions: Interactive effects of outcome and procedures. Psychological Bulletin,120, 189-208.
4.
Bruins, J.J. (1994). Evidentie voor de machtafstandstheorie [Evidence for power distance theory]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie, 49, 99-110.
5.
Bruins, J., den Ouden, M., Dépret, E., Extra, J., Górnik, M., Iannaccone, A., et al. (1993). On becoming a leader: Effects of gender and cultural differences on power distance reduction. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 411-426.
6.
Bruins, J.J., & Wilke, H.A.M. (1992). Cognitions and behaviour in a hierarchy: Mulder's power theory revisited. European Journal of Social Psychology , 22, 21-39.
7.
Bruins, J.J., & Wilke, H.A.M. (1993). Upward power tendencies in a hierarchy: Power distance theory versus bureaucratic rule. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 239-254.
8.
Bruins, J.J., & Wilke, H.A.M. (1996). Feelings of injustice after violation of succession rules in simulated organizations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 149-154.
9.
Croon, M. (1999). A mixed model for dyadic data. Unpublished manuscript , Tilburg University.
10.
David, H.A. (1988). The method of paired comparisons. London: Charles Griffin.
11.
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice. Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137-149.
12.
Dovidio, J.F., Brown, C.E., Heltman, K., Ellyson, S.L., & Keation, C.F. (1988). Power displays between women and men in discussions of gender-linked tasks: A multichannel study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,55, 580-587.
13.
Ellemers, N., Van Rijswijk, W., Bruins, J., & De Gilder, D. (1998). Group commitment as a moderator of attributional and behavioural responses to power use. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 555-573.
14.
Emerson, R.M. (1964). Power dependence relations: Two experiments. Sociometry, 27, 282-298.
15.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
16.
Fiske, S.T. (2001). Effects of power on bias. Power explains and maintains individual, group, and societal disparities. In A. Y. Lee-Chai, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption (pp. 181-193). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
17.
Frieze, I.H., & Boneva, B.S. (2001). Power motivation and motivation to help others . In A. Y. Lee-Chai & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption (pp. 75-89). Philadelphia : Psychology Press.
18.
Georgesen, J., & Harris, M.J. (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.
19.
Georgesen, J., & Harris, M.J. (2006). Holding onto power: Effects of powerholders' positional instability and expectancies on interactions with subordinates. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 451-468.
20.
Greenberg, J. (1983). Equity and equality as clues to the relationship between exchange participants. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 195-196.
21.
Grzelak, J.L., Bobrowski, E., Ossewska, D., & Wyszogrodzki, K. (1994). Is 3 less than 2? A negative effect of the number of allocation participants on prosocial orientations . Polish Psychological Bulletin,25, 223-240.
22.
Grzelak, J.L., Poppe, M., Czwartosz, Z., & Nowak, A. (1988). “Numerical trap”: A new look at outcome representation in studies on choice behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 143-159.
23.
Haslam, S.A. (2001). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. London: Sage.
24.
Hay, D.F., Payne, A., & Chadwick, A. (2004). Peer relations in childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 84-108.
25.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26.
Huguet, P., Monteil, J.M., Dumas, F., & Galvaing, M.P. (1999). Social presence effects in the Stroop task: Further evidence for an attentional view of social facilitation . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1011-1025.
27.
Kelman, H.C. (1974). Further thoughts on the processes of compliance, identification and internalization. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Perspectives on social power (pp. 125-177). Chicago: Aldine.
28.
Kelman, H.C. (2001). Reflections on social and psychological processes of legitimization and delegitimization. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 54-73). New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D.H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 10, 265-284.
30.
Kemper, T.D. (1984). Power, status and emotions: A sociological contribution to a psychophysiological domain. In K. R. Scherer & P. Ekman (Eds.), Approaches to emotion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Kipnis, D. (1972). Does power corrupt?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 33-41.
32.
Kipnis, D. (1974). The powerholder. In J. T. Tedeschi (Ed.), Perspectives on social power (pp. 82-122). Chicago: Aldine.
33.
Lee, M.T., & Ofshe, R. (1981). The impact of behavioural style and status characteristics on social influence: A test of two competing theories. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 73-82.
34.
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P., (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist , 57, 705-717.
35.
Martin, R., Suls, J., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Ability evaluation by proxy: Role of maximal performance and related attributes in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 781-791.
36.
Mazur, A. (1985). A biosocial model of status in face-to-face groups . Social Forces, 64, 377-402.
37.
Mazur, A., & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 353-397.
38.
McClelland, D.C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. New York: Irvington.
39.
Mulder, M. (1977). The daily power game. Leiden, Netherlands: H. E. Stenfert Kroese.
40.
Mulder, M., Veen, P., Hartsuiker, D., & Westerduin, T. (1971). Cognitive processes in power equalization. European Journal of Social Psychology , 1, 107-130.
41.
Mulder, M., Veen, P., Hijzen, T., & Jansen, P. (1973). On power equalization: A behavioral example of power distance reduction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 151-158.
42.
Mulder, M., Veen, P., Rodenburg, C., Frenken, J., & Tielens, H. (1973). The power distance reduction hypothesis on a level of reality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 87-96.
43.
Mullen, B., Salas, E., & Driskell, J.E. (1989). Salience, motivation, and artifact as contributions to the relation between participation rate and leadership . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 545-559.
44.
Ng, S.H. (1977). Structural and non-structural aspects of power distance reduction tendencies. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 317-345.
45.
Ng, S.H. (1980). The social psychology of power. London: Academic Press.
46.
Poppe, M. (2003). Preferences for changing power positions and power distances: A social value orientations approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 177-193.
47.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J. Stallworth, L. M., & Malle , B.F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 67, 741-763.
48.
Raven, B.H. (2001). Power/interaction and interpersonal influence: Experimental investigations and case studies. In: A. Y. Lee-Chai & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The use and abuse of power: Multiple perspectives on the causes of corruption (pp. 217-240). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
49.
Ridgeway, C.L. (1986). Dominance, performance, and status in groups: A theoretical analysis. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 1, pp. 59-93). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
50.
Ridgeway, C.L. (2001). The emergence of status beliefs: From structural inequality to legitimizing ideology. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 257-277). New York: Cambridge University Press.
51.
Ridgeway, C.L., & Erikson, K.G., (2000). Creating and spreading status beliefs. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 579-615.
52.
Ridgeway, C.L., Johnson, C., & Diekema, D. (1994). External status, legitimacy, and compliance in male and female groups. Social Forces, 72, 1051-1077.
53.
Rijsman, J. (1974). Factors in social comparison of performance influencing actual performance. European Journal of Social Psychology , 4, 279-311.
54.
Rijsman, J. (1983). The dynamics of social competition in personal and categorical comparison-situations. In W. Doise & S. Moscovici (Eds.), Current issues in European social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 279-312). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
55.
Rijsman, J. & Poppe, M. (1977). Power difference between players and level of matrix as determinants of competition in a MDG. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 347-367.
56.
Salovey, P., & Rodin, J. (1984). Some antecedents and consequences of social-comparison jealousy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 780-792.
57.
Scheepers, D., & Ellemers, N. (2005). When the pressure is up: The assessment of social identity threat in low and high status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 192-200.
58.
Schultheiss, O.C., Campbell, K.L., & McClelland, D.C. (1999). Implicit power motivation moderates men's testosterone responses to imagined and real dominance success . Hormones and Behavior, 36, 234-241.
59.
Schulz, U., & May, T. (1989). The recording of social orientations with ranking and pair comparison procedures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 19, 41-59.
60.
Seta, J. J. (1982). The impact of comparison processes on coactors' task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 42, 281-291.
61.
Seta, J.J., Seta, C.E., & Donaldson, S. (1991). The impact of comparison processes on coactors' frustration and willingness to expend effort. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 560-568.
62.
Spears, R., Jetten, J., & Scheepers, D. (2002). Distinctiveness and the definition of collective self: A tripartite model. In A. Tesser, D. A. Stapel, & J. V. Wood (Eds.), Self and motivation: Emerging psychological perspectives (pp. 147-171). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
63.
Strayer, F.F. (1995). Child ethology and the study of preschool social relations. In H. C. Foot & A. J. Chapman (Eds.), Friendship and social relations in children (pp. 235-265). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
64.
Tetlock, P.E. (2000). Cognitive biases and organizational correctives: Do both disease and cure depend on the politics of the beholder?Administrative Science Quarterly,45, 293-326.
65.
Turner, J.C., Hogg, M.A., Oakes, P.J., Reicher, S.D., & Wetherell, M.S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
66.
Van den Bos, K., Bruins, J., Wilke, H.A.M., & Dronkert, E. (1999). Sometimes unfair procedures have nice effects: On the psychology of the fair process effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 324-336.
67.
Van Dijke, M., & Poppe, M. (2003). Preferred changes in power differences: Effects of social comparison in equal and unequal power relations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 149-160.
68.
Van Dijke, M., & Poppe, M. (2004). Social comparison of power: Interpersonal versus intergroup effects. Group Dynamics, 8, 13-26.
69.
Van Dijke, M. & Poppe, M. (2006). Striving for personal power as a basis for social power dynamics. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 537-556.
70.
Wieczorkowska, G. (1982). A formal analysis of preferences. Polish Psychological Bulletin,13, 73-77.
71.
Wilke, H.A.M. (1985). Coalition formation from a socio-psychological perspective. In H. A. M. Wilke (Ed.), Coalition formation. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
72.
Willer, D., Lovaglia, M.J., & Markovsky, B. (1997). Power and influence: A theoretical bridge. Social Forces, 76, 571-603.
73.
Winter, D.G. (1988). The power motive in women—and men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 510-519.
74.
Wood, J.V. (1996). What is social comparison and how should we study it?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 520-537.
