Psychological science’s preoccupation with the powerful
Publication Type
Conference Proceeding Article
Publication Date
1-2016
Abstract
A pervasive assumption in the social power literature is that powerfulness is the driving causal force behind power’s far-reaching effects. This preoccupation with the powerful has led to the proliferation of experimental designs that contrast high power to either low power or a control condition. We review evidence suggesting that this convention poses both theoretical and methodological challenges. Across a content analysis, an experiment, and a large-scale meta- analysis, we find that (1) few studies allow for substantive inferences about powerlessness; (2) although control conditions are needed to interpret effect directionality, effects of studies comparing only high and low power tend to be attributed to powerfulness; and (3) comparing high power to a control condition in the absence of low power weakens construct validity and leads to an overestimation of the high-power effect. Our findings have profound implications for social power, experimental design, and other fields in psychology, management, and marketing.
Keywords
Experimental design, Meta-analysis, Power
Discipline
Cognition and Perception | Organizational Behavior and Theory
Research Areas
Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources
Publication
Academy of Management Proceedings: 2016, Anaheim, CA
Identifier
10.5465/AMBPP.2016.14097abstract
Publisher
Academy of Management
City or Country
San Diego
Citation
SCHAERER, Michael; DU PLESSIS, Christilene; YAP, Andy J.; and THAU, Stefan.
Psychological science’s preoccupation with the powerful. (2016). Academy of Management Proceedings: 2016, Anaheim, CA.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/5280
External URL
http://proceedings.aom.org/content/2016/1/14097.short
Additional URL
https://doi.org./10.5465/AMBPP.2016.14097abstract