Effects of gender, supervision, and presenting problems on practicum students' preference for interpersonal power bases.

Abstract

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

A preliminary investigation of the effect of correctional officers’ bases of power on their fear and risk of victimization

“…These bases of power have been applied to numerous organizations and situations, including supervisor and subordinate interactions in businesses (e.g., Bachman, Bowers, and Marcus 1968;Bachman, Smith, and Slesinger 1968;Schriesheim 1990, 1994;Mossholder et al 1998;Rahim 1989;Rahim and Buntzman 1991), salesperson and customer satisfaction (Zemanek and McIntyre 1995), doctor and patient interactions (Raven 1988), and teacher and student relationships (Aquinis et al 1996;Robyak et al 1986). Overall, the uses of referent, expert, and occasionally legitimate power are stronger predictors of gaining compliance among those in a subordinate or less powerful position (e.g., Bachman, Bowers, and Marcus 1968;Bachman, Smith, and Slesinger 1968;Schriesheim 1990, 1994;Mossholder et al 1998;Rahim 1989;Rahim and Buntzman 1991;Smith et al 2009).…”

“…Likewise, referent, expert, and legitimate power structures lead to greater job satisfaction and buy-in to the organizational goals (e.g., Bachman, Bowers, and Marcus 1968;Bachman, Smith, and Slesinger 1968;Schriesheim 1990, 1994;Mossholder et al 1998;Rahim 1989;Rahim and Buntzman 1991). While coercive and reward powers can be useful, when these powers are used too frequently or too blatantly, those in a less powerful position tend to become uncooperative and be less satisfied with their status (e.g., Aquinis et al 1996;Raven 1988;Robyak et al 1986;Zemanek and McIntyre 1995).…”

Effects of Supervisors' Sex, Focus, and Experience on Preferences for Interpersonal Power Bases

“…Although sex, amount of supervisory experience, and supervisory focus were found to affect supervisors' preferences for different power bases, the pattern of results is not entirely consistent with previous research. Supervisors and practicum students with relatively little experience preferred the referent power base to a greater extent than did supervisors and students with relatively more experience; however, unlike counselors (Robyak,198 1) and practicum students (Robyak et al, 1986), supervisors' preferences for the legitimate power base were not affected by sex or experience. The reasons for this discrepancy are not clear.…”

“…The independent variables in each analysis were supervisor sex (male, n= 33; female, n= 17), supervisory focus (self-awareness, n = 22; conceptualization, n = 2 8 ) , and amount of supervisor experience (low [S48 months], n= 27; high [>50 months], n = 2 3 ) . Because the amount of direct service counseling ex- perience was found to be related to preferences for power bases (Robyak et al, 1986), it was used as a covariate in this study. The results of the ANCOVAs are presented in Table 1.…”

“…Robyak (198 1) argued that, through experience, counselors develop preferences for using particular power bases under certain circumstances. Preferences for legitimate and expert power bases of experienced counseling center staff members have been shown to be influenced by sex (Robyak, 1981), and preferences for legitimate and referent power bases of counseling practicum students have been affected by the amount of supervised, direct service experience (Robyak, Goodyear, Prange, & Donham, 1986). Although supervision differs from counseling in a number of ways, it is possible that supervisors' preferences for power bases are influenced by factors similar to those that influence counselors' preferences.…”