Power makes people think, feel, and behave in ways that help them to maintain and increase power. Thus far, the mechanisms underlying power’s beneficial effects on goal pursuit have been investigated predominantly on a cognitive level. The present research tested whether power influences goal pursuit in an even more fundamental way, namely by improving actual behavior on motor-based tasks. Furthermore, we suggest that this effect is produced by changes in perceptual goal representation. Consistent with our assumptions, Experiment 1 found that individuals primed with high-power outperformed control participants on a golf-putting task. In Experiment 2, individuals receiving a high-power prime outperformed individuals receiving a low-power prime on a dart-throwing task. Moreover, high-power primed participants represented the focal goal (a dart board) in greater goal-relevant detail, which mediated the effect of power on motor performance. Taken together, these findings suggest that power shapes performance in more fundamental ways than previously assumed.
AndersonC.GalinskyA. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 511–536. doi:10.1002/ejsp.324
2.
CheemaA.BagchiR. (2011). The effect of goal visualization on goal pursuit: Implications for consumers and managers. Journal of Marketing, 75, 109–123. doi:10.1509/jmkg.75.2.109
3.
ChenS.Lee-ChaiA. Y.BarghJ. A. (2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 173–187. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.80.2.173
4.
DamischL.StoberockB.MussweilerT. (2010). Keep your fingers crossed! How superstition improves performance. Psychological Science, 21, 1014–1020. doi:10.1177/0956797610372631
5.
DeWallC. N.BaumeisterR. F.MeadN. L.VohsK. D. (2011). How leaders self-regulate their task performance: Evidence that power promotes diligence, depletion, and disdain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 47–65. doi:10.1037/a0020932
6.
FiskeS. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621–628. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.48.6.621
7.
FörsterJ.LibermanN.HigginsE. T. (2005). Accessibility from active and fulfilled goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 220–239. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.06.009
8.
FrenchJ. R. P.Jr.RavenB. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In CartwrightD. (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 118–149). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute of Social Research.
9.
GalinskyA. D.GruenfeldD. H.MageeJ. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 453–466. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453
10.
GalinskyA. D.MageeJ. C.GruenfeldD. H.WhitsonJ. A.LiljenquistK. A. (2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1450–1466. doi:10.1037/a0012633
11.
GuinoteA. (2007a). Power affects basic cognition: Increased attentional inhibition and flexibility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 685–697. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.06.008
12.
GuinoteA. (2007b). Power and goal pursuit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1076–1087. doi:10.1177/0146167207301011
13.
GuinoteA. (2007c). Behavior variability and the situated focus theory of power. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 256–295. doi:10.1080/10463280701692813
14.
GuinoteA. (2008). Power and affordances: When the situation has more power over powerful than over powerless individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 237–252. doi:10.1037/a0012518
15.
GuinoteA. (2010a). In touch with your feelings: Power increases reliance on bodily information. Social Cognition, 28, 110–121. doi:10.1521/soco.2010.28.1.110
16.
GuinoteA. (2010b). The situated focus theory of power. In GuinoteA.VescioT. K. (Eds.), The social psychology of power (pp. 141–174). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
17.
JeannerodM. (1988). The neural and behavioral organization of goal-directed movements. New York, NY: Clarendon Press.
18.
LammersJ.GalinskyA. D.GordijnE. H.OttenS. (2012). Power increases social distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 282–290. doi:10.1177/1948550611418679
19.
LammersJ.StapelD. A.GalinskyA. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy: Moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21, 737–744. doi:10.1177/0956797610368810
20.
LammersJ.StokerJ. I.StapelD. A. (2009). Differentiating social and personal power: Opposite effects on stereotyping, but parallel effects on behavioral approach tendencies. Psychological Science, 20, 1543–1548. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02479.x
21.
LangP. J.BradleyM. M.CuthbertB. N. (2008). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual(Technical Report A-8). Gainesville: University of Florida.
22.
LangnerC. A.KeltnerD. (2008). Social power and emotional experience: Actor and partner effects within dyadic interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 848–856. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.08.002
23.
LockeE. A.ShawK. N.SaariL. M.LathamG. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969–1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 125–152. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.90.1.125
24.
ManerJ. K.KaschakM. P.JonesJ. L. (2010). Social power and the advent of action. Social Cognition, 28, 122–132. doi:10.1521/soco.2010.28.1.122
25.
PhamL. B.TaylorS. E. (1999). From thought to action: Effects of process-versus outcome-based mental simulations on performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 250–260. doi:10.1177/0146167299025002010
26.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
27.
SlabuL.GuinoteA. (2010). Getting what you want: Power increases the accessibility of active goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 344–349. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.013
28.
SmithP. K.BarghJ. A. (2008). Nonconscious effects of power on basic approach and avoidance tendencies. Social Cognition, 26, 1–24. doi:10.1521/soco.2008.26.1.1
29.
SmithP. K.JostmannN. B.GalinskyA. D.van DijkW. W. (2008). Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psychological Science, 19, 441–447. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02107.x
30.
SmithP. K.TropeY. (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
31.
SmithP. K.WigboldusD. H.DijksterhuisA. (2008). Abstract thinking increases one’s sense of power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 378–385. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.005
32.
TropeY.LibermanN. (2010). Construal level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440–463. doi:10.1037/a0018963
33.
VescioT. K.GervaisS. J.SnyderM.HooverA. (2005). Power and the creation of patronizing environments: The stereotype-based behaviors of the powerful and their effects on female performance in masculine domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 658–672. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.658
34.
WeickM.GuinoteA. (2008). When subjective experiences matter: Power increases reliance on the ease of retrieval. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 956–970. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.956
35.
WespR.CichelloP.GraciaE. B.DavisK. (2004). Observing and engaging in purposeful actions with objects influences estimates of their size. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 1261–1267.
36.
WhitsonJ. A.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Lacking control increases illusory pattern perception. Science, 322, 115–117. doi:10.1126/science.1159845
37.
WillisG. B.GuinoteA. (2011). The effects of social power on goal content and goal striving: A situated perspective. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 706–719. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00382.x
38.
WittJ. K. (2011). Action’s effect on perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 201–206. doi:10.1177/0963721411408770
39.
WittJ. K.LinkenaugerS. A.ProffittD. R. (2012). Get me out of this slump! Visual illusions improve sports performance. Psychological Science, 23, 397–399. doi:10.1177/0956797611428810
40.
WittJ. K.ProffittD. R. (2005). See the ball, hit the ball: Apparent ball size is correlated with batting average. Psychological Science, 16, 937–938.
