The power of we: Evidence for group-based control

Fritsche, Immo; Jonas, Eva; Ablasser, Catharina; Beyer, Magdalena; Kuban, Johannes; Manger, Anna Marie; Schultz, Marlene

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.014

Cited by 181 publications

(269 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

235

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The two types of threats are often substitutable and function in a hydraulic fashion: Threats to personal agency (external agents) increase support for external agents (increase the perception of personal control), or, alternatively, result in the shifting of support among different external entities, all with the impetus of gaining greater agency through compensatory strategies (32,33). Along similar lines, Fritsche et al (34,35) have proposed a group-based control-restoration model wherein those who feel a lack of personal control because of threats in the environment engage in ethnocentric behaviors, such as ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation, to restore their sense of personal control. Moreover, echoing substitutability between group-and personal-level threats, the authors argue that grouplevel threats (e.g., lack of ingroup homogeneity) lead to group members feeling a lack of personal control and result in greater ethnocentric behaviors.…”

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

When the appeal of a dominant leader is greater than a prestige leader

Kakkar

Sivanathan

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

141

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across the globe we witness the rise of populist authoritarian leaders who are overbearing in their narrative, aggressive in behavior, and often exhibit questionable moral character. Drawing on evolutionary theory of leadership emergence, in which dominance and prestige are seen as dual routes to leadership, we provide a situational and psychological account for when and why dominant leaders are preferred over other respected and admired candidates. We test our hypothesis using three studies, encompassing more than 140,000 participants, across 69 countries and spanning the past two decades. We find robust support for our hypothesis that under a situational threat of economic uncertainty (as exemplified by the poverty rate, the housing vacancy rate, and the unemployment rate) people escalate their support for dominant leaders. Further, we find that this phenomenon is mediated by participants' psychological sense of a lack of personal control. Together, these results provide large-scale, globally representative evidence for the structural and psychological antecedents that increase the preference for dominant leaders over their prestigious counterparts.rom the recent Brexit vote in the United Kingdom (1), to the resurgence of nationalism in communist China (2), to the ascend of the authoritarian Narendra Modi in India (3), to the overwhelming support for Donald Trump in the US elections (4), we are witnessing a return of populist, authoritarian leaders, with rhetoric focused on nationalism and protectionism of indigenous citizens. Despite the general notion and research findings indicating that such individuals are often narcissistic, aggressive, and guided by a vague moral compass (5), their popularity remains steadfast even in the presence of other respected and admired candidates. This paper investigates when and why dominant leaders, despite the multitude of negative attributes associated with them, are often revered by a nation's citizens.We contend that the preference for a dominant leader increases with uncertainty and competitive threats in one's environment. When faced with a milieu of uncertainty and the resulting psychological lack of control, individuals favor a dominant/authoritarian leader who, they believe, has the capability to brave unfavorable winds and increase their future chances of success. We draw upon relevant literature in social psychology (6, 7), political psychology (8), and evolutionary psychology (9, 10) to develop our theoretical arguments.

show abstract

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

When the appeal of a dominant leader is greater than a prestige leader

Kakkar

Sivanathan

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

141

147

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Recent work (Agroskin & Jonas, 2010;Fritsche et al, 2013;Fritsche, Jonas, & Kessler, 2011) (Whitson & Galinsky, 2008). Fritsche and colleagues (2013) argued that "people who perceive low personal control may prefer to define their self via the in-group and act as an in-group member because this might maintain perceptions of power and control exerted through the (social) self."…”

Section: Defensiveness Of Collective Narcissismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism

Cichocka

2016

European Review of Social Psychology

141

262

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Specifically, these authors argued that collective efficacy exerts its effects on sustainable behavior through raising perceptions of self-efficacy. This process is explained by the model of group-based control that postulates individuals can derive personal benefits (e.g., self-efficacy beliefs) from social groups because groups can make them feel personally capable and in control [31,32]). In fact, Jugert et al [12] could show that through collective efficacy, individuals came to feel in control of their outcomes: People's intention to act was enhanced through providing a sense of efficacy transferred from the group to the self.…”

Section: Collective Efficacy and Pro-environmental Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Keep on Rockin’ in a (Plastic-)Free World: Collective Efficacy and Pro-Environmental Intentions as a Function of Task Difficulty

Reese

Junge

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Collective efficacy-the belief that one's group is capable of affecting relevant aspects of its environment-has been highlighted as an important predictor of sustainable behavior. It increases people's collective action tendencies, and is important for fostering environmental behavioral change beyond self-efficacy beliefs. The current study addresses two primary goals. First, we tested whether the difficulty of a task increased collective efficacy, and thereby environmental intentions. Second, we explored how collective and self-efficacy in concert predict such intentions. In a combined field-and-survey study, 165 voluntary participants took part in a plastic reduction challenge that was pretested as easy, moderate, or difficult. After being confronted with the task, participants completed an online questionnaire in which, among other variables, specific and general self-efficacy, collective efficacy, and pro-environmental intentions were measured-both general and plastic-reduction specific. Results revealed that (a) collective efficacy was significantly stronger when task difficulty was moderate rather than easy or difficult; and (b) that through specific collective and self-efficacy perceptions, sustainable intentions were gauged-even when controlling for attitudes and social norms. These findings suggest that collective efficacy beliefs are particularly relevant for attaining environmental goals that are neither too easy nor too difficult, and could thus be valuable for communication and policy strategies.

show abstract

The power of we: Evidence for group-based control

Cited by 181 publications

References 52 publications

When the appeal of a dominant leader is greater than a prestige leader

When the appeal of a dominant leader is greater than a prestige leader

Understanding defensive and secure in-group positivity: The role of collective narcissism

Keep on Rockin’ in a (Plastic-)Free World: Collective Efficacy and Pro-Environmental Intentions as a Function of Task Difficulty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About