The psychological consequences of power on self-perception: implications for leadership

Voyer, Benjamin G.; McIntosh, Bryan

doi:10.1108/lodj-10-2011-0104

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study extends previous research on leadership styles and the psychological consequences of power by unpacking the distinct influences of French and Raven's bases of power (Voyer and McIntosh, 2013). The present findings echo the research results of Parmer and Dillard (2019) that referent, expert and legitimate power were related to respectful and positive leader–follower relations; however, previous research did not include information power (Parmer and Dillard, 2019; Politis, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Maneuvering without offending on the road to democracy: the role of leaders' power in bringing greater freedom to all

Kalpokas

Radivojevic

2021

LODJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to expand understanding of how leaders can use their power to reshape macro-level structures to foster individuals' freedoms and build more democratic workplaces. The importance of freedom in work and life can hardly be argued with, yet current democracy scores are the lowest that have ever been recorded (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2019).Design/methodology/approachThe authors analyzed two cases of successful democratization, Spain and Lithuania, where they conducted a total of 65 semi-structured interviews with different actors including the top leaders themselves. A combined inductive-deductive analysis of the in-depth qualitative data highlighted how using different dimensions of power (French and Raven, 1959) related to distributing power to others.FindingsThese findings extend understanding of how leaders can use their power to effectively distribute power to others and reach a democracy that fosters freedom. Information and referent power were crucial for aligning the different stakeholder groups, expert power emerged as key for building and empowering a network of support and legitimate power was essential for fostering peaceful and long-lasting changes toward democracy.Originality/valueWhile previous research has recognized the importance of leadership and politics for instigating macro-level changes, this study specifies how leaders can utilize their different sources of power to bring greater power and freedom to individuals by unpacking the unique impacts of each type of power. This study thus provides practical insights for leaders seeking to establish more democratic workplaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

Maneuvering without offending on the road to democracy: the role of leaders' power in bringing greater freedom to all

Kalpokas

Radivojevic

2021

LODJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Few works in psychology have looked at the potential relation between self-construal and power. Lee and Tiedens (2001) hinted at a possible connection between power and self-construal, and, more recently, empirical and theoretical work further corroborated this relation (Voyer & Reader, 2013;Voyer & McIntosh, 2013).…”

Section: Role Of Power Social and Cultural Affordances In The Agencymentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Following Voyer and McIntosh (2013), power can be related to self-agency given its effects on individual perception and cogni-This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Section: Role Of Power Social and Cultural Affordances In The Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a Better Understanding of Self-Construal Theory: An Agency View of the Processes of Self-Construal

Voyer

Franks

2014

Review of General Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author's final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it.Running head: SELF-CONSTRUAL THEORY: AN AGENCY VIEW This article offers a novel perspective on self-construal theory. Self-construal concerns how individuals understand who they are in relation to the broad set of cultural influences in which they live. We look at the nature and antecedents of self-construal, and characterize it as a self-process, rather than self-knowledge. Integrating work from the literature on social and evolutionary psychology, and philosophy, we suggest that the differences between independent and interdependent self-construal are best understood from a self-agency perspective. This concerns how people assess whether they are the causes of an action and, if so, whether their causal role depends on other people. We introduce and discuss the roles of three different modalities of agency involved in agency assessment: implicit (sensorimotor), intermediate (self-related affordances), and explicit (reflective) self-agency. We offer a conceptual model on how self-agency relates to power, evolutionary motivations and to social and cultural affordances, in the formation of, and interaction with, different types of dominant independent and interdependent self-construals.Keywords: self-construal, self-agency, power, social and cultural affordances, social environment, evolutionary psychologyIn 1991, Markus and Kitayama published an article that focused on a fundamental question of psychology-namely, the relationship between the individual self and the social and cultural setting. This became one of the most influential articles of the decade, referred to by Devine and Brodish (2003, p. 200) as a 'modern classic in social psychology'; it is the fourth (see Footnote 1) most cited Psychological Review paper in the web of science (Anderson, 2011). Self-construal theory's original framing-the first systematic social psychological attempt to map the relationship between culture and the self-remains powerfully insightful today.Self-construal theory introduced a new way to understand the individual consequences of cross-cultural differences, in terms of their implications for the construal of the self. Relating the debates on Eastern versus Western values to the individual level, Markus and Kitayama (...

show abstract

“…A related process that could explain the persistent supervisory level association with work anger after stress is controlled is suggested by theory and research that indicates that power can change one's orientation toward others, and toward leadership (Voyer and McIntosh 2013). Recent research (Mooijman et al 2015) suggests that managers might use anger expression proactively to prevent or deter rule-breaking, because they distrust their subordinates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Stuck in the Middle with You?” Supervisory Level and Anger about Work

Magee

Upenieks

2017

Canadian Review of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although sociologists have long been interested in the stratification of emotions, the occupational stratification of anger has been investigated in only a few general population studies. Through analyses of data representative of workers in Toronto, we evaluate the hypothesis that workplace hierarchical position, defined by supervisory level, has an inverted u-shaped association with the frequency of anger about work. We also evaluate the more specific hypothesis that the difference in work-related anger between front-line supervisors and nonsupervisory workers will be relatively larger among workers in the commodified services sector than other sectors. Results are generally consistent with our hypotheses. We find that both front-line supervisors in the commodified services sector, and secondary supervisors in all employment sectors, report more frequent anger about work than do nonsupervisory workers. In contrast, higher level supervisors report anger about work at about the same frequency as nonsupervisory workers. These associations are only slightly reduced by controls for work stress and stressors. We discuss how supervisory relations might explain differences in anger about work among workers at different levels in organizational hierarchies.

show abstract

The psychological consequences of power on self-perception: implications for leadership

Cited by 16 publications

References 105 publications

Maneuvering without offending on the road to democracy: the role of leaders' power in bringing greater freedom to all

Maneuvering without offending on the road to democracy: the role of leaders' power in bringing greater freedom to all

Toward a Better Understanding of Self-Construal Theory: An Agency View of the Processes of Self-Construal

“Stuck in the Middle with You?” Supervisory Level and Anger about Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About