Power Can Bias Impression Processes: Stereotyping Subordinates by Default and by Design

Goodwin, Stephanie A.; Gubin, Alexandra; Yzerbyt, Vincent

doi:10.1177/1368430200003003001

Cited by 339 publications

(336 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

315

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The negative effect of power on metastereotyping that we found in our series of experiments goes in the opposite direction of the positive effect of power on otherstereotyping that is hypothesized by Fiske (1993) and extensively supported by later findings (De Dreu & Van Kleef, 2004;Dépret & Fiske, 1999;Ebenbach & Keltner, 1998;Goodwin, Gubin, Fiske, & Yzerbyt, 2000;Goodwin, Operario, & Fiske, 1998;Rodríguez-Bailón, Moya, & Yzerbyt, 2000). At the same time, however, recent findings show boundary conditions to the idea that power always leads to more heuristic processing and other-stereotyping (Chen et al, 2001;Chen, Ybarra, & Kiefer, 2004;Overbeck & Park, 2001Vescio, Snyder, & Butz, 2003).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Lammers

Gordijn

Otten

2008

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across four experiments, we test the idea that power decreases metastereotyping, and that this effect is mediated by reduced perspective taking. Metastereotypes refer to the beliefs that members of group A share about the stereotypes that members of specific outgroup B typically have about ingroup A. We propose that the dominant psychological orientation of the powerless is aimed at seeing how others see them. In an intergroup situation they are therefore inclined to activate and apply metastereotypes. In the first three experiments we consistently find that low power leads to more metastereotyping than high power and control (in Experiment 3). Specifically, we show this effect with three different manipulations of power, namely a role manipulation (Experiment 1), experiential priming (Experiment 2), and parafoveal priming (Experiment 3). In the fourth experiment we uncover the mediating role of perspective taking. Together these findings provide strong evidence that powerlessness leads to metastereotyping

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Lammers

Gordijn

Otten

2008

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, judgmentalness was a stronger mediator of our effects in Experiment 5 when respondents were describing negative behaviors. However, we are interested in judgmentalness more broadly, as an ability and willingness to make judgments and draw conclusions (cf., Goodwin, Gubin, Fiske, & Yzerbyt, 2000). In Experiment 6, we therefore again tested our multiple mediator model, exploring perceptions of the respondent as an abstract thinker and perceptions of the respondent as someone willing to make judgments as mediators of the linguistic abstraction/power judgment link.…”

Section: Mediatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using abstract language signals power.

Wakslak¹,

Smith²,

Han³

2014

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language Signals Power 2 AbstractPower can be gained through appearances: People who exhibit behavioral signals of power are often treated in a way that allows them to actually achieve such power (Ridgeway, Berger, & Smith, 1985;Smith & Galinsky, 2010). In the current paper we examine power signals within interpersonal communication, exploring whether use of concrete versus abstract language is seen as a signal of power. Since power activates abstraction (e.g., Smith & Trope, 2006), perceivers may expect higher-power individuals to speak more abstractly and therefore will infer that speakers who use more abstract language have a higher degree of power. Across a variety of contexts and conversational subjects in six experiments, participants perceived respondents as more powerful when they used more abstract language (versus more concrete language). Abstract language use appears to affect perceived power because it seems to reflect both a willingness to judge and a general style of abstract thinking.Keywords: power, perception, distance, abstraction, social judgment Abstract Language Signals Power 3 Managing other's impressions of one's power is a critical skill. Being seen as powerful can elicit treatment from others that allows one to actually achieve such power (Ridgeway, Berger, & Smith, 1985;Smith & Galinsky, 2010). Having power means having more control over one's own life and therefore is associated with numerous positive outcomes for the individual, including an increased ability to achieve one's goals (e.g., Galinsky, Gruenfeld, & Magee, 2003;Guinote, 2007;Karremans & Smith, 2010) and the goals of one's organization (Overbeck & Park, 2006), increased freedom to express oneself (e.g., Anderson & Berdahl, 2002) and behave in line with one's core values (e.g., Chen, Lee-Chai. & Bargh, 2001;DeCelles, DeRue, Margolis, & Ceranic, 2012), and even an array of positive health outcomes (e.g., Marmot et al., 1991;Sherman et al, 2012). Thus, the possession of power is often a goal in itself. Moreover, individuals who occupy high-power positions but are not perceived as powerful risk their position being viewed as illegitimate . While some behaviors signaling power may be difficult to enact with limited resources (e.g., loaning money, exerting influence, taking action; Goldhamer & Shils, 1939), others may be relatively easy to adopt (e.g., a lower-pitched voice; Carney, ).In the current paper we examine whether a person's use of relatively concrete or abstract language can serve as a subtle but meaningful signal of power, exploring this idea across six studies that manipulate linguistic abstraction in various ways and measure power and leadership inferences. Linguistic Abstraction as a Power CueRecent research on power inferences has increasingly emphasized the subtle ways that people signal their degree of power. Converging evidence suggests that when power is associated with a behavioral signal people become sensitive to the signal itself, leading them to infer the presence of power when witnessing the ass...

show abstract

“…In the absence of these manipulations, participants were not particularly motivated to either individuate or uphold their expectancies; they were relatively neutral observers. In part, this is because the expectancies used in this research have typically consisted of experimenter-induced trait expectancies or stereotypes about groups that fail to evoke strong prejudiced responses (e.g., individuals with schizophrenia; but see Goodwin, Gubin, Fiske, & Yzerbyt, 2000). In contrast, beliefs about homosexuals and Black men are much more volatile and likely to initiate motivated processing, even in the absence of particular instructions.…”

Section: Prejudice Processing Motives and Attentionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prejudice and Stereotype Maintenance Processes: Attention, Attribution, and Individuation.

Sherman

Stroessner

Conrey

et al. 2005

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments examined the relationship between prejudice and processing of stereotypic information. Higher levels of prejudice were associated with greater attention to and more thorough encoding of stereotype-inconsistent than stereotype-consistent behaviors but only when processing capacity was plentiful (Experiments 1 and 3). High-prejudice participants attributed consistent behaviors to internal factors and inconsistent behaviors to external forces (Experiment 2). Together, these results suggest that high-prejudice people attend carefully to inconsistent behaviors to explain them away but only if they have sufficient resources to do so. Results also showed that low-prejudice but not high-prejudice participants formed individuated impressions by integrating the implications of the target's behaviors (i.e., individuating). High levels of prejudice appear to be associated with biased encoding and judgment processes that may serve to maintain stereotypes.

show abstract

Power Can Bias Impression Processes: Stereotyping Subordinates by Default and by Design

Cited by 339 publications

References 40 publications

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Looking through the eyes of the powerful

Using abstract language signals power.

Prejudice and Stereotype Maintenance Processes: Attention, Attribution, and Individuation.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About