Leader power, power stability, and interpersonal trust

Mooijman, Marlon; Dijk, Wilco W. van; Dijk, Eric van; Ellemers, Naomi

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.009

Cited by 27 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 66 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Building on this point, our review provides evidence that while individuals' perceptions of constraints increase powerholders' negative behaviors (e.g., Fast et al, ; Mooijman et al, ), actual constraints reduce negative behaviors (Rus et al, ) because they draw powerholders' attention to different aspects of the environment. These results coincide with findings by Tost and Johnson (), who found that structural power had a stronger effect on prosocial outcomes than psychological power.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Building on this point, our review provides evidence that while individuals' perceptions of constraints increase powerholders' negative behaviors (e.g., Fast et al, 2012;Mooijman et al, 2019), actual constraints reduce negative behaviors (Rus et al, 2012) because they draw powerholders' attention to different aspects of the environment.…”

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…One consistent finding is that powerholders respond to perceived constraints upon their power by increasing negative or antisocial behaviors. For example, De Cremer and van Dijk (2005) found that perceived legitimacy interacted with power to amplify selfish and deviant behaviors, and Mooijman, van Dijk, van Dijk, and Ellemers (2019) found that lack of stability decreased powerholders' trust in others. Similarly, Fast et al (2012) found that high power and low status led to more demeaning tendencies than any other combination of power and status.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Power corrupts (or does it?): An examination of the boundary conditions of the antisocial effects of experienced power

Foulk

Chighizola

Chen

2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most common conclusions in the power literature is that when people feel powerful, they behave in selfish and antisocial ways. While this conclusion tends to permeate the literature, research also recognizes that there are factors that can mitigate the corrupting nature of power, and that the experience of power may also lead to more positive and prosocial outcomes. In this article, we review findings that illustrate how individual differences, the contexts in which people experience power, and their construal of power all help determine how powerful people will ultimately behave toward others. We then consider these findings in totality, and suggest that they may articulate a more complex conceptualization of power as it relates to social behaviors. Specifically, we suggest considering not only the amount of power one has but also focusing on the way individuals experience power may provide a way to reconcile the disparate findings in the social power literature. We argue that research should expand upon the possible dualistic nature of power, and how the existence of both positive and negative construals of power can influence behaviors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Power corrupts (or does it?): An examination of the boundary conditions of the antisocial effects of experienced power

Foulk

Chighizola

Chen

2020

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only having unstable power fuels distrust due to concerns about losing power (Mooijman et al, 2019). In other work, powerholders actually appeared more trusting, or even overconfident with respect to their ability to rely on others' loyalty and support, jeopardizing their position (e.g., Brion & Anderson, 2013;Hommelhoff & Richter, 2017).…”

Section: The Present Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our prediction and results regarding power imbalance clearly advance frameworks and theories on the connection between trust and power. As reviewed in more detail above, this area has produced seemingly inconsistent findings regarding whether high or low power may reduce or increase trust, typically focusing on powerholders in organizations or trust games (e.g., Hommelhoff & Richter, 2017;Mooijman et al, 2015;Mooijman et al, 2019;Schilke et al, 2015). Across a large spectrum of real-life social interactions and associated power differentials, and controlling for other aspects of situational interdependence, our data suggest that both accounts may have a point, as indicated by the inverted U-shaped pattern connecting power with trust.…”

Section: Situational Determinants Of Everyday Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in everyday life.

Weiß

Michels

Burgmer

et al. 2021

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although trust plays a pivotal role in many aspects of life, very little is known about the manifestation of trust and distrust in everyday life. In this work, we integrated several prior approaches to trust and investigated the prevalence and key determinants of trust (vs. distrust) in people's natural environments, using preregistered experience-sampling methodology. Across more than 4,500 social interactions from a heterogeneous sample of 427 participants, results showed high average levels of trust, but also considerable variability in trust across contexts. This variability was attributable to aspects of trustee perception, social distance, as well as three key dimensions of situational interdependence: conflict of interests, information (un)certainty, and power imbalance. At the dispositional level, average everyday trust was shaped by general trust, moral identity, and zero-sum beliefs. The social scope of most trust-related traits, however, was moderated by social distance: Whereas moral identity buffered against distrusting distant targets, high general distrust and low social value orientation amplified trust differences between close vs. distant others. Furthermore, a laboratory-based trust game predicted everyday trust only with regard to more distant but not close interaction partners. Finally, everyday trust was linked to self-disclosure and to cooperation, particularly in situations of high conflict between interaction partners' interests. We conclude that trust can be conceptualized as a relational hub that interconnects the social perception of the trustee, the relational closeness between trustor and trustee, key structural features of situational interdependence, and behavioral response options such as self-disclosure.

show abstract

Procedural justice enactment as an instrument of position protection: The three‐way interaction between leaders' power position stability, followers' warmth, and followers' competence

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Studies have started to examine factors that explain when and why leaders enact procedural justice. However, these studies have not considered the idea that justice enactment can be a self‐serving instrument for leaders. In this paper, we propose a threat‐based tripartite model of procedural justice enactment. Specifically, we examine how leaders in unstable (vs. stable) power positions combine information from the two fundamental dimensions of person perception—that is, their perceptions of a follower's competence and warmth—to shape the level of procedural justice they enact toward the follower. In support of our model, the results of a multisource organizational field study and a laboratory experiment show that leaders in unstable power positions enact procedural justice, particularly toward followers whom they perceive as highly competent but low in warmth. We discuss our findings in light of their implications for the justice and leadership literatures.

show abstract

Leader power, power stability, and interpersonal trust

Cited by 27 publications

References 66 publications

Power corrupts (or does it?): An examination of the boundary conditions of the antisocial effects of experienced power

Power corrupts (or does it?): An examination of the boundary conditions of the antisocial effects of experienced power

Trust in everyday life.

Procedural justice enactment as an instrument of position protection: The three‐way interaction between leaders' power position stability, followers' warmth, and followers' competence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About