Week 3: Power Flashcards
1
Q
Power
A
Asymmetric control over
valued resources in social
relationships
2
Q
How can we see powerholders according to Brauer & Bourhis ?
A
As actors
As perceivers
As targets of perception
3
Q
Powerful groups as targets are attributed …
A
more positive traits than less powerful groups
4
Q
What is the fundamental attribution error
A
The cause for power is on the person for high power people and the cause for power is situational for low power people
5
Q
According to Bauer & Bourhis, powerful people are attributed positive traits. What do they also get / are perceived as?
A
Perceived as competent
Perceived as more heterogeneous
Behavior is motivated
are seen as center of attention
Also:
Have more discriminative and ingroup bias
6
Q
Powerful people show more/less inhibition
A
Less
7
Q
Which behavior is shown in powerholders due to disinhibition?
A
Flirting
▫ Talk longer
▫ Take action
▫ Gestural activities
▫ Show more emotions
▫ Share more opinions
▫ Optimism risk-seeking behavior
8
Q
Keltner, gruenfeld & Anderson (2003) “Power, approach and inhibition” paper is theoretical and not empirical. What is their theory about?
A
Determinants and consequences of power
9
Q
Which 4 variables do Keltner et al (2003) discuss?
A
Individual variables
Dyadic variables
Within group variables
Between group variables
10
Q
Name two examples of individual variables
A
Traits
Physical attributes
11
Q
Name two examples of dyadic variables
A
Interest in relationships
Commitment
12
Q
Name two examples of within-group variables
A
Authority
Status
13
Q
Name two examples of between-group variables
A
Race
Gender
Class
Ideology
14
Q
The different variables of Keltner et al. (2003) lead to?
A
Social power
15
Q
What does social power according to kerltner et al. (2003) lead to for high and for low power people?
A
High power approach:
prone to positive emotion
focus on achieving goals
disinhibited behavior
attention to rewards
Low power:
Negative emotion
Attention on losses/ punishment
Inhibited behavior
16
Q
What is the name of the research from Brauer & Bourhis?
A
Social Power
17
Q
What is the definition of Intergroup power according to Brauer & Boris?
A
It constitutes a group’s control over its own fate and the fate of out-groups
18
Q
How do Brauer & Bourhis define Social status?
A
The relative position of groups on valued dimensions of comparison such as educational achievement, occupational status, wealth and speech style
19
Q
Name the levels of the Epistemological continuum and explain them (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
- Ideological level
2.Intergroup level
3.Inter-personal level
4.Intra-personal level
20
Q
According to the epistemological continuum, which theory of power belongs to the Ideological level? (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
Social Dominance Theory
21
Q
According to the epistemological continuum, which 2 theories of power belong to the Intergroup level? (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
Three Process Theory of Power
Identity Model of Power
22
Q
According to the epistemological continuum, which theory of power belong to the Inter-personal level? (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
Asymmetrical Outcome Dependency theory
23
Q
According to the epistemological continuum, which theory of power belongs to the Intra-personal level? (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
Approach-Inhibition Theory of Power
24
Q
Approach inhibition theory of power (Brauer & Bourhis)
A
How the presence of power affects individual behavior. According to this theory, people with power tend to exhibit approach behavior, which manifests as self-assurance, assertiveness and goal pursuit.
25
Asymmetrical outcome dependency theory (Brauer & Bourhis)
Explain and name the general idea of this theory
Individuals or groups are considered powerful when their outcomes are less dependent on others than the outcomes of others are dependent on them.
General idea: People have the basic need for control
26
Three process theory of power (Brauer & Bourhis)
Turner sees *power* as the consequence of *influence*, and influence, in turn, is caused by *psychological group formation*.
27
Name the three social influence processes (Brauer & Bourhis)
1. Persuasion: capacity of convincing (in-group members) that decision is right and valid.
2. Authority: Having control based on in-group norms and rhe right to control others and in-group members.
3. Coercion: Control others against their will (forcing) - can be counterproductive and undermines the impact of persuasion and authority
28
Identity model of power (Brauer & Bourhis)
Power should be seen not only as a conflictual coercive force but also as a consensual productive and organizing force. Power is not control of people’s outcomes but the control of people’s active contributions or inputs
29
Social dominance theory (Brauer & Bourhis)
Theory of intergroup relations that focuses on the maintenance and stability of group-based social hierarchies.
30
Social dominance
orientation (SDO)? (Brauer & Bourhis)
when you are becoming more powerful, you assume you are a powerful person because you are better than others and that less powerful people are less powerful because they deserve to be less powerful.
31
People who score ... on social dominance orientation believe the world is ..., whereas people who score ... on social dominance orientation think that society should be more ... (Brauer & Bourhis)
high - hierarchical
low - equalitarian
32
Powerful people show more ... and greater ... (Brauer & Bourhis)
discrimination
in-group bias
33
How does Social Dominance Orientation explain discrimination and in-group bias in people with power? (Brauer & Bourhis)
Because of their social dominance orientation (SDO), where they assume that they are powerful because they are better than others, and that less powerful people have less power because they deserve it.
34
How does power affect perceptions of variability and use of stereotypes?(Brauer & Bourhis)
Powerful people perceive less variability and use stereotypes more. They focus less on less powerful people, leading to cognitive laziness and the use of more cognitive biases and heuristics in judging other groups.
35
Name 3 reasons wht are powerful groups often attributed more positive traits and seen as more competent (Brauer & Bourhis)
1. Justification: they are powerful, so they must do something really well -justification of the system/status quo
2. Halo effect/romance of leadership: if a group does something great it is attributes to the leader (can be good or bad).
3. Reality: some leaders are chosen for there good qualities
36
According to Brauer & Bourhis, are powerful people more perceived as heterogeneous or homogeneous?
Heterogeneous;
When looking at a group of powerful people, we perceive them as more heterogeneous, because we look quit well at powerful people (are center of attention). *They are the center of attention*: when the national team walks by, you will probably look up.
But powerful people perceive *less powerful groups* as more *homogeneous*.
37
What do Brauer & Bourhis mean with "Powerful people their behavior is seen as dispositionally motivated"?
when powerful people do something we most of the time assume that they are doing that because they want to, because they are powerful they have more degrees of freedom -- fundamental attribution error: dispositional for high power vs. situational for low power
38
What are the behaviors observed in people with power according to Brauer & Bourhis their concept of "Powerholders as actors"?
Less inhibitions such as:
- flirtation behavior
- talking longer
- taking action
- more gestures
- expression of more emotions
- expressing opinions
- optimistic attitude
-- risk seeking behavior
39
What is the research called of Keltner, Gruenfeld & Anderson ?
Power, Approach and Inhibition
40
Explain Elevated Power ( Keltner et al.,)
Involves reward-rich environments and freedom, triggers approach-related positive affect, attention to rewards, automatic cognition and disinhibited behavior.
41
Explain Reduced power (Keltner et al.,)
Associated with increased threat, punishment and social constraint and thereby activates inhibition-related negative affect, vigilant, systematic cognition and situationally constrained behavior.
42
Name the 3 consequences of power named by Keltner et al.,
- Power-vigilance hypothesis
- Subordination hypothesis
- Power-as-control account of stereotyping
43
Explain the Power-vigilance hypothesis? (Keltner et al.,)
low-power individuals attend to others more carefully to navigate more threatening social environments, whereas high-power individuals are attended to more carefully by others
44
Explain the subordination hypothesis (Keltner et al.,)
women are less powerful and more vigilant than men are
45
What is the consequence of that women are less powerful and more vigilant than men are? (Keltner et al.,)
Women judge others' nonverbal behavior more accurately and express themselves more clearly.
46
Explain Power-as-control account of stereotyping ( Keltner et al.,)
high-power individuals are more likely to stereotype others than low-power individuals, because they are less motivated to attend to others carefully
47
Name the 4 determinants of Power (Keltner et al.,)
Individual variables
Dyadic variables
Within-group variables
Between-group variables
48
Name some individual variables that can determine a person's power (Keltner et al.,)
Personality traits (e.g., extraversion) and physical characteristics
49
What is meant by dyadic variables in the context of power? (Keltner et al.,)
Dyadic variables determine individual power in correlation with other factors, such as interest and commitment to the relationship.
50
Explain what within-group variables entails which affects power within a group (Keltner et al.,)
Within-group variables include the extent to which group members can provide resources to others, such as authority and status
51
Whichfactors distuinguish groups from one another? (Keltner et al.,)
- Gender
- race
- class
- ideology
- numerical majority/minority.
52
According to Keltner et al, what determines whether an individual has high power?
Because of factors such as resources and freedom.
53
Name 4 approach tendencies of Elevated power? (Keltner et al.,)
Attention to rewards
Positive emotions
Automatic cognition
Disinhibited/approach behavior
54
What is the relationship between power and attention to rewards? (Keltner et al.,)
Power makes individuals focused on obtaining positive outcomes and opportunities for material rewards
55
How does power influence positive emotions?(Keltner et al.,)
Powerful individuals show more willingness to show positive emotions and may even experience more positive emotions.
56
What does automatic cognition entail for individuals with high power?(Keltner et al.,)
Individuals with high power are more vulnerable to stereotyping, exhibit more discrimination toward outsiders, favor the in-group more, and have more self-centeredness in collective tasks.
57
What is meant by behavior without inhibitions or approach behavior in powerful individuals?(Keltner et al.,)
Powerful individuals exhibit freer behavior, where they are more inclined to engage in risky behavior because they feel they have the freedom to do so.
58
Name 4 approach tendencies of reduced power? (Keltner et al.,)
Attention to losses
Negative emotion
Systematic, controlled cognition
Inhibited behavior
59
Name the 5 moderators of the effect of social power? Keltner et al.,
1. Stability of power relations
2. Perceived threat
3. Accountability
4. Individual differences
5. Cultural differences
60
What do they mean by 'Stability of power relations' when it comes to the moderators of power? (Keltner et al.,)
Power can be revoked or is non-negotiable in certain systems.
61
How does perceived threat moderates the effects of social power? (Keltner et al.,)
If a powerful person is unsure of his or her future power, that person may think more about his or her actions, thus reducing the effects of power.
62
How does accountability moderates social power holders' thinking about other groups? (Keltner et al.,)
Accountability makes people think more clearly about other groups and use fewer cognitive heuristics. They make more conscious decisions.
63
What role do individual differences play in the effects of power?
Individuals who are prone to approach-oriented behaviors conform to the pattern of power-related affects, cognitions and behaviors when obtaining power
64
How does power distance in cultural differences affect the behavior of the powerful and powerless?(keltner et al.,)
Cultures with great power distance facilitate the more free behavior of the powerful and the inhibition of the powerless.
65
What is the name of the research of Galinsky, Gruenfeld & Magee?
Interpersonal relations and group processes
66
Why should power lead to action?(Galinsky et al.,)
1. No social interferences and constraints
2. Power activates behavioral approach system
3. Leads to lower levels of delibiration (process information less thoroughly)
67
Explain the difference in results between high- vs low power participants during the experiment "Hit me!" from Galinsky et al.,.
high-power participants chose to take a card more often than low-power participants.
! Control and Lowpower behave the same, but when you give power, this changes - posessing power leads to action!
68
Explain the difference in results between high- vs low power participants during the experiment "The annoying fan" from Galinsky et al.,
High power participants were more likely to take action against the fan than low-power participants
69
Explain the difference in results between high- vs low power participants during the experiment "Corruptibility and responsibility" from Galinsky et al.,
People in high power position take more and contribute more (no effect on type of dilemma)
70
Does power always corrupt? (Galinksky et al.,)
No, the corruption of power depends on the situation.
71
What drives the effects of power - the presence or absence of power? (Galinsky et al.,)
It is the presence of power and not its absence that drives the effects.
72
What is the name of the research from Greer & Kleef?
Equality vs differentiation
73
What do Greer & Kleef mean with "Group power dispersion"?
The differences in power concentration among group members. When the dispersion in the group is highest, one group member has significantly more power than other group members.
74
What are the 3 benefits of power distribution within a group? (Greer & Kleef)
- Conflict resolution through a heuristic guiding mechanism for resource allocation (by communicating norms about entitlements within group and by creating order and facilitating coordination).
And
Conflict resolution due to feelings of inequality and injustice
75
What is the difference between a common good dilemma and a public good dilemma?(Galinsky et al.,)
A common good dilemma sees action as something negative (taking from a limited pool). In a public good dilemma, action is seen as something positive (contributing to a shared resource).
76
What is the difference in self-interest between a public good dilemma and a common good dilemma? (Galinsky)
There is more self-interest in a public good dilemma than in a common good dilemma.
77
What is the common good dilemma?(Galinsky et al.,)
Problem of consumption, you
need to restrict yourself, not take too much - action is something negative (taking out of a limited pool)
78
What is the public good dilemma? (Galinsky et al.,)
Problem of contribution - action is seen as something positive but only after reaching a certain treshhold
79
What interactive effects were observed in power dispersion and power level in working groups? (Greer & Kleef)
They show interactive effects on *power struggles* and *conflict resolution* in work groups.
80
What was the relationship between power dispersion and quality of conflict resolution in low-power teams? (Study 1 Greer & Kleef)
Dispersion of power positively related to the quality of conflict resolution
81
What was the relationship between power dispersion and the quality of conflict reasoning in high-power teams?(Study 1 Greer & Kleef)
In teams with high power, power dispersion was negatively related to the quality of conflict reasoning
82
What mediated the interaction between power dispersion and power level in terms of conflict resolution (Study 1 Greer & Kleef)?
The interaction was mediated by the *prevalence of power struggles* in the teams.
83
How did powerlevel and powerdispersion influence conflict resolution in low-power pairs? (Study 2 Greer & Kleef)
Conflict resolution wasless effective in low-power dispersion situations more effective in high-power dispersion situations
84
What was the relationship in study 2 between power level, power dispersion and power struggle in the results? (Greer & Kleef)
Dyads with *low power* and *low dispersion* had more power struggles than dyads with *low power* and *high dispersion*.
In contrast, dyads with *high power* and *low power dispersion* had fewer power struggles than dyads with *high power* and *high dispersion*
