Although extant research suggests that power without status, but not status without power, induces interpersonal conflict, we are yet to fully understand the asymmetric effects of holding power or status on psychological processes and group functioning. The present research attempts to fill this gap by arguing that holding power would heighten the motivation for status, whereas holding status may not necessarily have an equivalent effect on the motivation for power. We further proposed that power–status misalignment within a group would lead powerholders to be competitive toward statusholders due to heightened status motive and (upon failure to attain status) invest less in their group due to greater emotional distress. Across four (and one Supplemental) studies, we found support for our hypotheses. Our findings not only shed further light on the interactive effects of power and status, but also help better explain why power without status is particularly related to negative outcomes.
AczelB.PalfiB.SzollosiA.KovacsM.SzasziB.SzecsiP.ZrubkaM.GronauQ. F.van den BerghD.WagenmakersE.-J. (2018). Quantifying support for the null hypothesis in psychology: An empirical investigation. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918773742
2.
AndersonC.HildrethJ. A. D.HowlandL. (2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psychological Bulletin, 141(3), 574–601. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038781
3.
AnicichE. M.FastN. J.HalevyN.GalinskyA. D. (2016). When the bases of social hierarchy collide: Power without status drives interpersonal conflict. Organization Science, 27(1), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1019
4.
AnicichE. M.LeeA. J.LiuS. (2022). Thanks, but no thanks: Unpacking the relationship between relative power and gratitude. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48, 1005–1023. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211025945
5.
BatesD.MaechlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS.ChristensenR.SingmannH. (2017). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4, 2014. R Package Version.
6.
BaumeisterR. F.LearyM. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
7.
BelmiP.LaurinK. (2016). Who wants to get to the top? Class and lay theories about power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 505–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000060
8.
BennettJ. B. (1988). Power and influence as distinct personality traits: Development and validation of a psychometric measure. Journal of Research in Personality, 22(3), 361–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(88)90036-0
9.
BergerJ.CohenB. P.ZelditchM.Jr. (1972). Status characteristics and social interaction. American Sociological Review, 37(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.2307/2093465
10.
BladerS. L.ChenY.-R. (2011). What influences how higher-status people respond to lower-status others? Effects of procedural fairness, outcome favorability, and concerns about status. Organization Science, 22(4), 1040–1060. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0558
11.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026651
12.
BladerS. L.ShirakoA.ChenY.-R. (2016). Looking out from the top: Differential effects of status and power on perspective taking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(6), 723–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216636628
13.
BoehmC. (1999). Hierarchy in the forest. Harvard University Press.
14.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Sage.
15.
BuckleyK. E.WinkelR. E.LearyM. R. (2004). Reactions to acceptance and rejection: Effects of level and sequence of relational evaluation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00064-7
16.
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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8301_04
17.
CaseC. R.ManerJ. K. (2014). Divide and conquer: When and why leaders undermine the cohesive fabric of their group. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107(6), 1033–1050. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038201
18.
ChenF. X.ZhangX.LaustsenL.ChengJ. T. (2021). Harsh but expedient: Dominant leaders increase group cooperation via threat of punishment. Psychological Science, 32(12), 2005–2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211031208
19.
ChengJ. T. (2020). Dominance, prestige, and the role of leveling in human social hierarchy and equality. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 238–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.10.004
20.
ChesterD. S.DeWallC. N. (2017). Combating the sting of rejection with the pleasure of revenge: A new look at how emotion shapes aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112(3), 413–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000080
21.
ChowR. M.TiedensL. Z.GovanC. L. (2008). Excluded emotions: The role of anger in antisocial responses to ostracism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 896–903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2007.09.004
22.
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.260
23.
DurkeeP. K.LukaszewskiA. W.BussD. M. (2020). Psychological foundations of human status allocation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(35), 21235–21241. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2006148117
24.
FastN. J.HalevyN.GalinskyA. D. (2012). The destructive nature of power without status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.07.013
25.
FlynnF. J.ReagansR. E.AmanatullahE. T.AmesD. R. (2006). Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(6), 1123–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.6.1123
26.
FragaleA. R.OverbeckJ. R.NealeM. A. (2011). Resources versus respect: Social judgments based on targets’ power and status positions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 767–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.006
27.
GalinskyA. D.GruenfeldD. H.MageeJ. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453
28.
GohJ. X.HallJ. A.RosenthalR. (2016). Mini meta-analysis of your own studies: Some arguments on why and a primer on how. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(10), 535–549. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12267
29.
GouldR. V. (2002). The origins of status hierarchies: A formal theory and empirical test. American Journal of Sociology, 107(5), 1143–1178. https://doi.org/10.1086/341744
30.
GreenP.MacLeodC. J. (2016). SIMR: An R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(4), 493–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504
31.
GruenfeldD. H. (2020). Acting with power: Why we are more powerful than we believe. Currency.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford.
34.
HaysN. A. (2013). Fear and loving in social hierarchy: Sex differences in preferences for power versus status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 1130–1136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.08.007
35.
HaysN. A.BenderskyC. (2015). Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 867–882. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000017
36.
HaysN. A.LiH.YangX.OhJ. K.YuA.ChenY.-R.HollenbeckJ. R.JamiesonB. B. (2022). A tale of two hierarchies: Interactive effects of power differentiation and status differentiation on team performance. Organization Science, 33(6), 2085–2540. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1540
37.
HenrichJ.Gil-WhiteF. J. (2001). The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(3), 165–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00071-4
38.
HildrethJ. A. D.AndersonC. (2016). Failure at the top: How power undermines collaborative performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(2), 261–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000045
39.
HullK. E.OverbeckJ. R.SmillieL. D.HoweP. D. (2022). The P-Word: Power aversion and responsibility aversion as explanations for the avoidance of power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(3), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12857
40.
JensenM.KimB.KimH. (2011). The importance of status in markets: A market identity perspective. In PearceJ. L. (Ed.), Status in management and organizations (pp. 87–117). Cambridge University Press.
41.
KakkarH.SivanathanN.GobelM. S. (2020). Fall from grace: The role of dominance and prestige in the punishment of high-status actors. Academy of Management Journal, 63(2), 530–553. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2017.0729
KimB. K. (2020). Normative uncertainty and middle-status innovation in the US daily newspaper industry. Strategic Organization, 18(3), 377–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127019832795
44.
KuwabaraK.YuS.LeeA. J.GalinskyA. D. (2016). Status decreases dominance in the West but increases dominance in the East. Psychological Science, 27(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615612694
45.
LammersJ.GalinskyA. D.GordijnE. H.OttenS. (2008). Illegitimacy moderates the effects of power on approach. Psychological Science, 19(6), 558–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02123.x
LoveJ.SelkerR.MarsmanM.JamilT.DropmannD.VerhagenJ.LyA.GronauQ. F.ŠmíraM.EpskampS.MatzkeD.WildA.KnightP.RouderJ. N.MoreyR. D.WagenmakersE.-J. (2019). JASP: Graphical statistical software for common statistical designs. Journal of Statistical Software, 88(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v088.i02
48.
MageeJ. C.GalinskyA. D. (2008). 8 social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351–398. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520802211628
49.
MageeJ. C.SmithP. K. (2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(2), 158–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732
50.
MageeJ. C.LangnerC. A. (2008). How personalized and socialized power motivation facilitate antisocial and prosocial decision-making. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(6), 1547–1559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.07.009
51.
MahadevanN.GreggA. P.SedikidesC. (2019). Is self-regard a sociometer or a hierometer? Self-esteem tracks status and inclusion, narcissism tracks status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(3), 444–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000189
52.
ManerJ. K.MeadN. L. (2010). The essential tension between leadership and power: When leaders sacrifice group goals for the sake of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(3), 482–497. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018559
53.
MargoniF.BaillargeonR.SurianL. (2018). Infants distinguish between leaders and bullies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(38), E8835–E8843. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801677115
54.
MasonM. F.ZhangS.DyerR. L. (2010). Male susceptibility to attentional capture by power cues. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 482–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.014
55.
McClanahanK. J.ManerJ. K.ChengJ. T. (2022). Two ways to stay at the top: Prestige and dominance are both viable strategies for gaining and maintaining social rank over time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(10), 1516–1528. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211042319
56.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.).
57.
NgS. H. (1980). The social psychology of power. Academic Press.
58.
RedheadD. J.ChengJ. T.DriverC.FoulshamT.O’GormanR. (2019). On the dynamics of social hierarchy: A longitudinal investigation of the rise and fall of prestige, dominance, and social rank in naturalistic task groups. Evolution and Human Behavior, 40(2), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.12.001
59.
RidgewayC. L. (2019). Status: Why is it everywhere? Why does it matter?Russell Sage Foundation.
60.
SheldonK. M. (2011). Integrating behavioral-motive and experiential-requirement perspectives on psychological needs: A two process model. Psychological Review, 118(4), 552–569. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024758
61.
SlabuL.GuinoteA. (2010). Getting what you want: Power increases the accessibility of active goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 344–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.013
62.
TayL.DienerE. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023779
63.
ThomsenL. (2020). The developmental origins of social hierarchy: How infants and young children mentally represent and respond to power and status. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 201–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.07.044
64.
ToC.KilduffG. J.RosikiewiczB. L. (2020). When interpersonal competition helps and when it harms: An integration via challenge and threat. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 908–934. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0145
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314525203
YuA.HaysN. A.ZhaoE. Y. (2019). Development of a bipartite measure of social hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 152, 84–104. https://doi.org/0.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.011
69.
YuS.BladerS. L. (2020). Why does social class affect subjective well-being? The role of status and power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(3), 331–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219853841
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.
