Off-campus UMass Amherst users: To download dissertations, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your UMass Amherst user name and password.
Non-UMass Amherst users, please click the view more button below to purchase a copy of this dissertation from Proquest.
(Some titles may also be available free of charge in our Open Access Dissertation Collection, so please check there first.)
Power and motivated impression formation
Four studies explore the relationship between power--control over others' outcomes--and impression formation. Participants in each study occupied different power roles: the powerful (managers) controlled others' outcomes, the powerless (employees) were contingent on the powerful for outcomes, and the power-irrelevant (alternate participants) neither controlled the powerless nor were contingent on the powerful. Dependent measures included attention to target trait information and impression ratings. Power-irrelevant targets served as the experimental control condition. Participants were predicted to ignore both stereotype-consistent and stereotype-inconsistent information about these targets, forming moderately stereotypic but relatively less confident impressions. Powerful participants were predicted to stereotype subordinates by default (ignoring stereotype-inconsistent information) and by design (effortfully attending to stereotype-consistent information). As a result, powerholders' impressions of subordinates were predicted to be most stereotypic and most confident. In contrast, the powerless were predicted to individuate the powerful, effortfully attending to stereotype-inconsistent information and forming less stereotypic impressions, relative to the other groups. The results of Study 1 support the hypotheses regarding attention to trait information; attention to trait information varied as a function of perceiver/target power roles. The impression rating data did not support the hypothesized relationship between power and stereotyping. Studies 2-4 failed to replicate the attention data of Study 1. Intergroup versus intragroup contexts are discussed as a possible explanation for the failure to replicate across studies. ^
Stephanie Ann Goodwin,
"Power and motivated impression formation"
(January 1, 1997).
Electronic Doctoral Dissertations for UMass Amherst.