IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v149y2018icp73-96.html

Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and empirical test

Author

Listed:
  • Schaerer, Michael
  • du Plessis, Christilene
  • Yap, Andy J.
  • Thau, Stefan

Abstract

We examine the role of low-power individuals in social power research. A multi-method literature review reveals that low-power individuals may be insufficiently understood because many studies lack necessary control conditions that allow drawing inferences about low power, effects are predominantly attributed to high power, and qualitative reviews primarily focus on how high-power individuals feel, think, and behave. Challenging the assumption that low power tends to produce opposite consequences of high power, we highlight several similarities between the two states. Based on social exchange theories, we propose that unequal-power (vs. equal-power) relationships make instrumental goals, competitive attitudes, and exchange rules salient, which can cause both high- and low-power individuals to behave similarly. Two experiments suggest that although low-power individuals sometimes behave in opposite ways to high-power individuals (i.e., they take less action), at other times they behave similarly (i.e., they objectify others to the same extent). We discuss the systematic study of low-power individuals and highlight methodological implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Yap, Andy J. & Thau, Stefan, 2018. "Low power individuals in social power research: A quantitative review, theoretical framework, and empirical test," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 73-96.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:149:y:2018:i:c:p:73-96
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.08.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597816300826
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.08.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical decision making," Post-Print hal-00814614, HAL.
    2. March, James G., 1955. "An Introduction to the Theory and Measurement of Influence," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 431-451, June.
    3. Schaerer, Michael & Loschelder, David D. & Swaab, Roderick I., 2016. "Bargaining zone distortion in negotiations: The elusive power of multiple alternatives," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 156-171.
    4. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Compliant sinners, obstinate saints: How power and self-focus determine the effectiveness of social influences in ethical decision making," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00814614, HAL.
    5. Mannix, Elizabeth A., 1993. "Organizations as Resource Dilemmas: The Effects of Power Balance on Coalition Formation in Small Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Inesi, M. Ena, 2010. "Power and loss aversion," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 58-69, May.
    7. Derek D. Rucker & Adam D. Galinsky & David Dubois, 2012. "Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value," Post-Print hal-00724231, HAL.
    8. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Post-Print hal-00814565, HAL.
    9. Giessner, S.R. & Schubert, T.W., 2007. "High in the Hierarchy: How Vertical Location and Judgments of Leaders' Power are Interrelated," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-021-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. Giessner, Steffen R. & Schubert, Thomas W., 2007. "High in the hierarchy: How vertical location and judgments of leaders' power are interrelated," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 30-44, September.
    11. J.P. Sheposh & P.S. Gallo JR, 1973. "Asymmetry of Payoff Structure and Cooperative Behavior in the Prisoner's Dilemma Game," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 17(2), pages 321-333, June.
    12. Raphael Silberzahn & Eric L. Uhlmann, 2015. "Crowdsourced research: Many hands make tight work," Nature, Nature, vol. 526(7572), pages 189-191, October.
    13. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau, 2013. "Masters of the universe: How power and accountability influence self-serving decisions under moral hazard," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00814565, HAL.
    14. J. Stuart Bunderson & Ray E. Reagans, 2011. "Power, Status, and Learning in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1182-1194, October.
    15. Thompson, Leigh & Hastie, Reid, 1990. "Social perception in negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 98-123, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gokce Basbug & Ayn Cavicchi & Susan S. Silbey, 2023. "Rank Has Its Privileges: Explaining Why Laboratory Safety Is a Persistent Challenge," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 571-587, May.
    2. Machiels, Casparus J.A. & Orth, Ulrich R., 2017. "Verticality in product labels and shelves as a metaphorical cue to quality," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 195-203.
    3. Li Yan & Hean Tat Keh & Xiaoyu Wang, 2021. "Powering Sustainable Consumption: The Roles of Green Consumption Values and Power Distance Belief," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 499-516, March.
    4. Nicholas A. Hays & Huisi (Jessica) Li & Xue Yang & Jo K. Oh & Andrew Yu & Ya-Ru Chen & John R. Hollenbeck & Bradley B. Jamieson, 2022. "A Tale of Two Hierarchies: Interactive Effects of Power Differentiation and Status Differentiation on Team Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(6), pages 2085-2105, November.
    5. Paramita, Widya & Septianto, Felix & Winahjoe, Sari & Purwanto, B.M. & Candra, Ika Diyah, 2020. "Sharing is (not) caring? The interactive effects of power and psychological distance on tolerance of unethical behavior," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 42-49.
    6. Alexandra Rausch & Alexander Brauneis, 2015. "It’s about how the task is set: the inclusion–exclusion effect and accountability in preprocessing management information," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 313-344, June.
    7. Bhukya, Ramulu & Paul, Justin, 2023. "Social influence research in consumer behavior: What we learned and what we need to learn? – A hybrid systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    8. Yang, Zian & Yang, Zhi, 2025. "Accountability and referent Selection: Evidence from Chinese mutual funds," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    9. Welton Chang & Pavel Atanasov & Shefali Patil & Barbara A. Mellers & Philip E. Tetlock, 2017. "Accountability and adaptive performance under uncertainty: A long-term view," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(6), pages 610-626, November.
    10. Barone, Michael J. & Coulter, Keith S. & Li, Xingbo, 2020. "The Upside of Down: Presenting a Price in a Low or High Location Influences How Consumers Evaluate It," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 397-410.
    11. Bill McEvily & Akbar Zaheer & Darcy K. Fudge Kamal, 2017. "Mutual and Exclusive: Dyadic Sources of Trust in Interorganizational Exchange," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 74-92, February.
    12. Aitao Lu & Meichao Zhang & Yulan Shao & Yanping Yu & Shuang Zheng & Jing Ye & Hui Yi & Lu Wang, 2015. "What Directions Do We Look at Power from? Up-Down, Left-Right, and Front-Back," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    13. Melanie de Waal & Floor Rink & Janka Stoker, 2015. "How internal and external supervisors influence employees' self-serving decisions," DNB Working Papers 464, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    14. Marko Pitesa & Stefan Thau & Madan M. Pillutla, 2013. "Cognitive control and socially desirable behavior: The role of interpersonal impact," Working paper serie RMT - Grenoble Ecole de Management hal-00853900, HAL.
    15. Liang, Yongyi & Yan, Ming & Law, Kenneth S. & Wang, Haibo & Chen, Yuanyi, 2021. "Integrating the bright and dark sides of leadership: An investigation of the intragroup and intergroup effects of leader group prototypicality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 89-97.
    16. Brady, Garrett L. & Inesi, M. Ena & Mussweiler, Thomas, 2021. "The power of lost alternatives in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 59-80.
    17. Edward Bishop Smith & Tanya Menon & Leigh Thompson, 2012. "Status Differences in the Cognitive Activation of Social Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 67-82, February.
    18. Hart, Einav & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2020. "Getting to less: When negotiating harms post-agreement performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 155-175.
    19. Leavitt, Keith & Zhu, Luke (Lei) & Klotz, Anthony & Kouchaki, Maryam, 2022. "Fragile or robust? Differential effects of gender threats in the workplace among men and women," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Peecher, Mark E. & Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2013. "An accountability framework for financial statement auditors and related research questions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 596-620.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:149:y:2018:i:c:p:73-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.