The Experts below are selected from a list of 69504 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Adam D Galinsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
when the bases of Social Hierarchy collide power without status drives interpersonal conflict
Organization Science, 2015Co-Authors: Eric M Anicich, Nathanael J Fast, Nir Halevy, Adam D GalinskyAbstract:Leveraging the Social Hierarchy literature, the present research offers a role-based account of the antecedents of interpersonal conflict. Specifically, we suggest that the negative feelings and emotions resulting from the experience of occupying a low-status position interact with the action-facilitating effects of power to produce vicious cycles of interpersonal conflict and demeaning behavior. Five studies demonstrate that power without status leads to interpersonal conflict and demeaning treatment, both in specific dyadic work relationships and among organizational members more broadly. Study 1 provides initial support for the prediction that employees in low-status/high-power roles engage in more conflict with coworkers than all other combinations of status and power. In Studies 2a and 2b, a yoked experimental design replicated this effect and established low-status/high-power roles as a direct source of the interpersonal conflict and demeaning treatment. Study 3 used an experimental manipulation of relative status and power within specific dyadic relationships in the workplace and found evidence of a vicious cycle of interpersonal conflict and demeaning treatment within any dyad that included a low-status/high-power individual. Finally, Study 4 utilized survey and human resource data from a large government agency to replicate the power without status effect on interpersonal conflict and demonstrate that power interacts with subjective status change to produce a similar effect; increasing the status of a high-power role reduces conflict whereas decreasing its status increases conflict. Taken together, these findings offer a role-based account of interpersonal conflict and highlight the importance of making a theoretical distinction between status and power.
-
8 Social Hierarchy the self reinforcing nature of power and status
The Academy of Management Annals, 2008Co-Authors: Joe C Magee, Adam D GalinskyAbstract:Abstract Hierarchy is such a defining and pervasive feature of organizations that its forms and basic functions are often taken for granted in organizational research. In this review, we revisit some basic psychological and sociological elements of Hierarchy and argue that status and power are two important yet distinct bases of hierarchical differentiation. We first define power and status and distinguish our definitions from previous conceptualizations. We then integrate a number of different literatures to explain why status and power hierarchies tend to be self‐reinforcing. Power, related to one’s control over valued resources, transforms individual psychology such that the powerful think and act in ways that lead to the retention and acquisition of power. Status, related to the respect one has in the eyes of others, generates expectations for behavior and opportunities for advancement that favor those with a prior status advantage. We also explore the role that Hierarchy‐enhancing belief systems play...
Yamir Moreno - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
heterogeneous resource allocation can change Social Hierarchy in public goods games
Royal Society Open Science, 2017Co-Authors: Sandro Meloni, Chengyi Xia, Yamir MorenoAbstract:Public goods games (PGGs) represent one of the most useful tools to study group interactions. However, even if they could provide an explanation for the emergence and stability of cooperation in mo...
-
heterogeneous resource allocation can change Social Hierarchy in public goods games
arXiv: Physics and Society, 2016Co-Authors: Sandro Meloni, Chengyi Xia, Yamir MorenoAbstract:Public Goods Games represent one of the most useful tools to study group interactions between individuals. However, even if they could provide an explanation for the emergence and stability of cooperation in modern societies, they are not able to reproduce some key features observed in Social and economical interactions. The typical shape of wealth distribution - known as Pareto Law - and the microscopic organization of wealth production are two of them. Here, we introduce a modification to the classical formulation of Public Goods Games that allows for the emergence of both of these features from first principles. Unlike traditional Public Goods Games on networks, where players contribute equally to all the games in which they participate, we allow individuals to redistribute their contribution according to what they earned in previous rounds. Results from numerical simulations show that not only a Pareto distribution for the payoffs naturally emerges but also that if players don't invest enough in one round they can act as defectors even if they are formally cooperators. Finally, we also show that the players self-organize in a very productive backbone that covers almost perfectly the minimum spanning tree of the underlying interaction network. Our results not only give an explanation for the presence of the wealth heterogeneity observed in real data but also points to a conceptual change regarding how cooperation is defined in collective dilemmas.
Nicholas A. Hays - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
to thine own empowered self be true aligning Social Hierarchy motivation and leader behavior
Journal of Applied Psychology, 2020Co-Authors: Nicholas A. Hays, Russell E JohnsonAbstract:Research to date has advanced opposing viewpoints on whether leaders who are psychologically empowered support the autonomy of their subordinates or engage in controlling leader behaviors. Our integration of research on empowerment and Social Hierarchy suggests that leaders' feelings of empowerment can promote autonomy-supporting and/or controlling leader behaviors, contingent on the leaders' prestige and dominance motivations, respectively. Our findings demonstrate that, among leaders high (vs. low) in prestige motivation, psychological empowerment is positively related to autonomy-supporting leader behaviors because these leaders prefer to influence others by earning their freely conferred respect and deference. In contrast, among leaders high (vs. low) in dominance motivation, psychological empowerment is positively related to controlling leader behaviors because these leaders prefer to influence others using authority and control. Three empirical studies support our theoretical model. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
-
Development of a bipartite measure of Social Hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2019Co-Authors: Nicholas A. Hays, Emma Y. ZhaoAbstract:Abstract Recent advances in Social Hierarchy research highlight that power and status are two prevalent but distinct bases of Hierarchy. However, these distinctions have yet to be thoroughly explored in contexts where power and status coexist and can covary. This is, in part, due to the lack of an appropriate measure capable of capturing power and status as distinct constructs. In order to advance research on Social Hierarchy and bridge the empirical findings from Social psychology research to organizational research, this paper outlines the development of a 12-item bipartite measure of perceived power and perceived status. Using seven samples, we develop a psychometrically sound measure and provide evidence of construct validity. Our results not only support the importance of distinguishing between these two prevalent bases of Social Hierarchy, but also highlight the potential dangers of capturing one base of Hierarchy without accounting for the other.
-
fear and loving in Social Hierarchy sex differences in preferences for power versus status
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2013Co-Authors: Nicholas A. HaysAbstract:Abstract Famous thinkers throughout history from Nepos to Machiavelli have had strong opinions about whether it is better to be feared or loved. A related debate continues today about whether it is preferable to have power or status, a distinction between resources and respect. Across three studies, I find that men desire power more than women do, whereas women desire status more than men do. Furthermore, the extent to which hierarchical differences are seen as fair and legitimate increases the desirability of status, but power legitimacy does not affect the desirability of power. This research indicates that people perceive and value power and status distinctly, and provides additional evidence that confounding the two theoretically or empirically may distort our understanding of psychological responses to Social Hierarchy.
Jennifer L. Stoner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
culture and Social Hierarchy collectivism as a driver of the relationship between power and status
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2020Co-Authors: Lisa M. Leslie, Carlos J. Torelli, Jennifer L. StonerAbstract:Abstract Power and status are distinct bases of Social Hierarchy with unique effects. Yet evidence suggests wide variation in whether perceptions of status and power are highly correlated versus relatively distinct. We use a cross-cultural lens to explain this variation and suggest cultural orientation shapes the effect of power on perceived status and vice versa. Six studies using various methodologies and samples demonstrate that: (1) individuals high (versus low) on vertical collectivism are more likely to perceive high power targets as also high in status; (2) individuals high (versus low) on horizontal collectivism are more likely to perceive high status targets as also high in power; and (3) cultural differences in the power-status relationship qualify prior conclusions regarding established effects of power and status on one downstream consequence—namely, fairness enacted towards others. Implications for theory, practice, and future research are discussed.
-
Culture and Social Hierarchy: Cultural Differences in the Power-Status Distinction
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017Co-Authors: Lisa M. Leslie, Carlos J. Torelli, Jennifer L. StonerAbstract:Integrating Social Hierarchy and cross-cultural psychology research, we investigate whether the magnitude of the relationship between perceived status and power varies with cultural orientation. We...
Sandro Meloni - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
heterogeneous resource allocation can change Social Hierarchy in public goods games
Royal Society Open Science, 2017Co-Authors: Sandro Meloni, Chengyi Xia, Yamir MorenoAbstract:Public goods games (PGGs) represent one of the most useful tools to study group interactions. However, even if they could provide an explanation for the emergence and stability of cooperation in mo...
-
heterogeneous resource allocation can change Social Hierarchy in public goods games
arXiv: Physics and Society, 2016Co-Authors: Sandro Meloni, Chengyi Xia, Yamir MorenoAbstract:Public Goods Games represent one of the most useful tools to study group interactions between individuals. However, even if they could provide an explanation for the emergence and stability of cooperation in modern societies, they are not able to reproduce some key features observed in Social and economical interactions. The typical shape of wealth distribution - known as Pareto Law - and the microscopic organization of wealth production are two of them. Here, we introduce a modification to the classical formulation of Public Goods Games that allows for the emergence of both of these features from first principles. Unlike traditional Public Goods Games on networks, where players contribute equally to all the games in which they participate, we allow individuals to redistribute their contribution according to what they earned in previous rounds. Results from numerical simulations show that not only a Pareto distribution for the payoffs naturally emerges but also that if players don't invest enough in one round they can act as defectors even if they are formally cooperators. Finally, we also show that the players self-organize in a very productive backbone that covers almost perfectly the minimum spanning tree of the underlying interaction network. Our results not only give an explanation for the presence of the wealth heterogeneity observed in real data but also points to a conceptual change regarding how cooperation is defined in collective dilemmas.
