Power and gratitude are universal features of social life and impact a wide range of intra- and interpersonal outcomes. Drawing on the social distance theory of power, we report four studies that examine how relative power influences feelings and expressions of gratitude. An archival analysis of author acknowledgements in published academic articles (N = 1,272) revealed that low-power authors expressed more gratitude than high-power authors. A pre-registered experiment (N = 283) involving live conversations online found that having relatively low power caused increased feelings and expressions of gratitude after benefiting from a favor. Another pre-registered experiment (N = 356) demonstrated that increased interpersonal orientation among lower power individuals and increased psychological entitlement among higher power individuals drove these effects. Finally, an archival analysis of conversational exchanges (N = 136,215) among Wikipedia editors revealed that relational history moderated the effect of relative power on gratitude expression. Overall, our findings highlight when and why relative power influences feelings and expressions of gratitude.
AldridgeT. T.AudretschD.DesaiS.NadellaV. (2014). Scientist entrepreneurship across scientific fields. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(6), 819–835.
2.
AlgoeS. B. (2012). Find, remind, and bind: The functions of gratitude in everyday relationships. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(6), 455–469.
3.
AlgoeS. B.GableS. L.MaiselN. C. (2010). It’s the little things: Everyday gratitude as a booster shot for romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 17(2), 217–233.
4.
AlgoeS. B.KurtzL. E.HilaireN. M. (2016). Putting the “you” in “thank you”: Examining other-praising behavior as the active relational ingredient in expressed gratitude. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(7), 658–666.
5.
AnicichE. M. (2016). The psychological experience of middle-power in social hierarchies: A theoretical and empirical investigation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Columbia University.
6.
AnicichE. M.HirshJ. B. (2017a). The psychology of middle power: Vertical code- switching, role conflict, and behavioral inhibition. Academy of Management Review, 42(4), 659–682.
AnicichE. M.SchaererM.GaleJ.FoulkT. A. (2020). A fluctuating sense of power is associated with reduced well-being. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 92, Article 104057.
9.
BartlettM. Y.DeStenoD. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when it costs you. Psychological Science, 17(4), 319–325.
10.
BladerS. L.ChenY. R. (2012). Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 994–1014.
11.
BrownZ. C.AnicichE. M.GalinskyA. D. (2020). Compensatory conspicuous communication: Low status increases jargon use. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 161, 274–290.
12.
CampbellW. K.BonacciA. M.SheltonJ.ExlineJ. J.BushmanB. J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83(1), 29–45.
13.
CaseC. R.ConlonK. E.ManerJ. K. (2015). Affiliation-seeking among the powerless: Lacking power increases social affiliative motivation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 378–385.
14.
ChengS. T.TsuiP. K.LamJ. H. (2015). Improving mental health in health care practitioners: Randomized controlled trial of a gratitude intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 83(1), 177–186.
15.
CheungF. M.LeungK.ZhangJ. X.SunH. F.GanY. Q.SongW. Z.XieD. (2001). Indigenous Chinese personality constructs—Is the Five-Factor model complete?Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 407–433.
16.
ChoY.FastN. J. (2012). Power, defensive denigration, and the assuaging effect of gratitude expression. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(3), 778–782.
17.
CôtéS.StellarJ. E.WillerR.ForbesR. C.MartinS. R.BianchiE. C. (2020). The psychology of entrenched privilege: High socioeconomic status individuals from affluent backgrounds are uniquely high in entitlement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47, 70–88.
18.
Danescu-Niculescu-MizilC.LeeBoPangL.KleinbergJ. (2012). Echoes of power: Language effects and power differences in social interaction. In Proceedings of WWW 2012: 21st International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 699–708). ACM.
19.
De CremerD.Van DijkE. (2005). When and why leaders put themselves first: Leader behaviour in resource allocations as a function of feeling entitled. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(4), 553–563.
20.
EmersonR. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27, 31–41.
21.
EmmonsR. A.McCulloughM. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 377–389.
22.
FiskeS. T. (1993). Controlling other people. The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48(6), 621–628.
23.
FiskeS. T.BerdahlJ. (2007). Social power. In KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 678–692). Guilford Press.
24.
FiskeS. T.NeubergS. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category- based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 1–74). Academic Press.
25.
GalinskyA. D.MageeJ. C.InesiM. E.GruenfeldD. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1068–1074.
26.
GalinskyA. D.RuckerD. D.MageeJ. C. (2015). Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R.SimpsonJ. A.DovidioJ. F. (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology. APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 3. Interpersonal relations (pp. 421–460). American Psychological Association.
27.
GanM.HellerD.ChenS. (2018). The power in being yourself: Feeling authentic enhances the sense of power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(10), 1460–1472.
28.
GoodwinS. A.GubinA.FiskeS. T.YzerbytV. Y. (2000). Power can bias impression processes: Stereotyping subordinates by default and by design. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 3(3), 227–256.
29.
GrantA. M.GinoF. (2010). A little thanks goes a long way: Explaining why gratitude expressions motivate prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(6), 946–955.
30.
HaseltonM. G.BussD. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 81–91.
31.
HashimotoH.YamagishiT. (2013). Two faces of interdependence: Harmony seeking and rejection avoidance. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16(2), 142–151.
32.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. Guilford Press.
33.
HuangK.YeomansM.BrooksA. W.MinsonJ.GinoF. (2017). It doesn’t hurt to ask: Question-asking increases liking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 430–452.
34.
InesiM.GruenfeldD. H.GalinskyA. D. (2012). How power corrupts relationships: Cynical attributions for others’ generous acts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 795–803.
35.
KaplanS.Bradley-GeistJ. C.AhmadA.AndersonA.HargroveA.LindsayA. (2014). A test of two positive psychology interventions to increase employee well-being. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(3), 367–380.
36.
KashdanT. B.UswatteG.JulianT. (2006). Gratitude and hedonic and eudaimonic well- being in Vietnam war veterans. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(2), 177–199.
37.
KelleyH. H.BerscheidE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ. H.HustonT. L.LevingerG.PetersonD. R. (1983). Analyzing close relationships. In KelleyH. H.BerscheidE.ChristensenA.HarveyJ. H.HustonT. L.LevingerG.PetersonD. R. (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 20–67). Freeman.
38.
KelleyH. H.ThibautJ. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. Wiley.
KunstmanJ. W.FitzpatrickC. B.SmithP. K. (2018). Poisoned praise: Discounted praise backfires and undermines subordinate impressions in the minds of the powerful. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(4), 470–480.
41.
LammersJ.GalinskyA. D.GordijnE. H.OttenS. (2012). Power increases social distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(3), 282–290.
42.
LeeF.TiedensL. Z. (2001). Is it lonely at the top? The independence and interdependence of power holders. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 43–91.
43.
LeeH. W.BradburnJ.JohnsonR. E.LinS. H. J.ChangC. H. D. (2018). The benefits of receiving gratitude for helpers: A daily investigation of proactive and reactive helping at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(2), 197–213.
44.
LibaersD. (2014). Foreign-born academic scientists and their interactions with industry: Implications for university technology commercialization and corporate innovation management. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 346–360.
45.
MacKenzieM. J.BaumeisterR. F. (2019). Motivated gratitude and the need to belong: Social exclusion increases gratitude for people low in trait entitlement. Motivation and Emotion, 43(3), 412–433.
46.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398.
47.
MageeJ. C.MillikenF. J.LurieA. R. (2010). Power differences in the construal of a crisis: The immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 354–370.
48.
MageeJ. C.SmithP. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186.
49.
MilesG. J.SmyrniosK. X.JacksonM.FrancisA. J. (2019). Reward-punishment sensitivity bias predicts narcissism subtypes: Implications for the etiology of narcissistic personalities. Personality and Individual Differences, 141, 143–151.
50.
MooijmanM.KouchakiM.BeallE.GrahamJ. (2020). Power decreases the moral condemnation of disgust-inducing transgressions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 161, 79–92.
51.
NeriaA. L.VizcainoM.JonesD. N. (2016). Approach/avoidance tendencies in dark personalities. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 264–269.
52.
PelserJ.de RuyterK.WetzelsM.GrewalD.CoxD.van BeuningenJ. (2015). B2B Channel Partner Programs: Disentangling Indebtedness from Gratitude. Journal of Retailing, 91(4), 660–678.
53.
PennebakerJ. W.BoothR. J.BoydR. L.FrancisM. E. (2015). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2015. Pennebaker Conglomerates.
54.
PiffP. K. (2014). Wealth and the inflated self: Class, entitlement, and narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(1), 34–43.
55.
RaskinR. N.HallC. S. (1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45(2), Article 590.
56.
RobinsR. W.HendinH. M.TrzesniewskiK. H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(2), 151–161.
57.
RuckerD. D.GalinskyA. D. (2016). The agentic-communal model of power: Implications for consumer behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 1–5.
58.
RuckerD. D.GalinskyA. D.MageeJ. C. (2018). The agentic–communal model of advantage and disadvantage: How inequality produces similarities in the psychology of power, social class, gender, and race. In OlsonJ. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 58, pp. 71–125). Academic Press.
59.
SawaokaT.HughesB. L.AmbadyN. (2015). Power heightens sensitivity to unfairness against the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(8), 1023–1035.
60.
SchmeichelB. J. (2007). Attention control, memory updating, and emotion regulation temporarily reduce the capacity for executive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 241–255.
61.
ShaneS.StuartT. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.
62.
SingelisT. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580–591.
63.
SmithP. K.MageeJ. C. (2015). The interpersonal nature of power and status. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 152–156.
64.
SmithP. K.TropeY. (2006). You focus on the forest when you’re in charge of the trees: Power priming and abstract information processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 578–596.
65.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 845–851.
66.
SwapW. C.RubinJ. Z. (1983). Measurement of interpersonal orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 208–219.
67.
TwengeJ. M.CampbellW. K. (2009). The narcissism epidemic: Living in the age of entitlement. Simon and Schuster.
68.
Van KleefG. A.OveisC.van der LöweI.LuoKoganA.GoetzJ.KeltnerD. (2008). Power, distress, and compassion: Turning a blind eye to the suffering of others. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1315–1322.
69.
WatersL. (2012). Predicting job satisfaction: Contributions of individual gratitude and institutionalized gratitude. Psychology, 3(12), 1174–1176.
70.
WaytzA.ChouE. Y.MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2015). Not so lonely at the top: The relationship between power and loneliness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 130, 69–78.
71.
WilliamsM. J. (2014). Serving the self from the seat of power goals and threats predict leaders’ self-interested behavior. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1365–1395.
72.
YangH.Van de VliertE.ShiK.HuangX. (2008). Whose side are you on? Relational orientations and their impacts on side-taking among Dutch and Chinese employees. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 81(4), 713–731.
73.
ZhaoX.LynchJ. G.Jr.ChenQ. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
