In the current research, we examined whether the amount of risk-taking in individuals with a position of power is affected by the way they interpret their power, which can be either as an...Show moreIn the current research, we examined whether the amount of risk-taking in individuals with a position of power is affected by the way they interpret their power, which can be either as an opportunity or as a responsibility. The hypothesis that was tested was that people who are primarily focused on the opportunities of their power are more risk-seeking than people who are primarily concerned with the responsibilities. To manipulate the interpretation of power, a prime was used in which half of the total amount of participants (N = 193) had to write something about the possibilities their position provided, and the other half had to write something about the responsibilities. To measure the risk-taking, participants had to choose between a safer and a riskier option in five fictitious scenarios. There was no statistically significant difference between the two conditions (opportunity and responsibility). The prime had a significant effect in the responsibility condition, but not in the opportunity condition, which could be an explanation for the fact that the amount of risk-taking did not differ significantly between the two groups. For future research, it could be prudent to use a different manipulation and a different risk measure.Show less
Abstract This study investigated the relationship between power construal, risk-taking, and the moderating role of leadership experience. Previous research on how leaders construe their power and...Show moreAbstract This study investigated the relationship between power construal, risk-taking, and the moderating role of leadership experience. Previous research on how leaders construe their power and its effects on risk-taking has yielded mixed results. According to the Upper-Echelons Theory, more leadership experience should reduce risk-taking. We hypothesized that power construal affects risk-taking differently, leadership experience in the current position decreases risk-taking, and experience moderates the former relationship. Using an online survey, we manipulated power construal through autobiographical recall and measured risk-taking with a modified risk in-basket task. The results did not support our hypotheses, but we found a marginally significant positive association between experience in the current leadership position and risk-taking. Future research could explore this relationship further and use alternative measures for assessing our modified version of the risk in-basket task. Layman’s Abstract This study explored how leaders view their power and how this affects their willingness to take risks. Previous research shows mixed results for this. The Upper- Echelons Theory suggests that more experienced leaders tend to take fewer risks. We tested three ideas: how leaders perceive their power affects risk-taking, experienced leaders take fewer risks, and that experience influences the first relationship. Participants recalled work events and performed a task to measure risk-taking behavior. While our findings did not fully support these ideas, we noticed that leaders with more experience might be slightly more likely to take risks. Future research could further investigate this relationship and use different methods to test the effectiveness of our risk-taking task.Show less
Macht kan geconstrueerd worden als mogelijkheid (middel om doelen te bereiken) of als verantwoordelijkheid (plicht om zorg te dragen voor anderen). We verwachtten dat wanneer machthebbers zich meer...Show moreMacht kan geconstrueerd worden als mogelijkheid (middel om doelen te bereiken) of als verantwoordelijkheid (plicht om zorg te dragen voor anderen). We verwachtten dat wanneer machthebbers zich meer richten op verantwoordelijkheden (dan op mogelijkheden),zij minder risicovolle beslissingen nemen. Daarnaast werd ook gekeken naar de rol van identificatie met ondergeschikten, het aantal ondergeschikten, het aantal jaar in een machtspositie en of men intern of extern geworven werd, in de bereidheid om risico’s te nemen. Dit werd gedaan door middel van een online survey, waarin managers in verschillende scenario’s moesten kiezen tussen een risicovolle- en veilige optie. De resultaten toonden aan dat het aantal ondergeschikten en het aantal jaar dat iemand een machtspositie heeft, significant negatieve voorspellers zijn voor risicovol gedrag. Er werd geen significant verband gevonden tussen Power Construal en risicovol gedrag. Resultaten worden bediscussieerd in termen van verklaringen voor de bevestigde en onbevestigde hypotheses. Deze inzichten kunnen bijdragen aan het gerichter aandacht geven aan situaties waar mogelijk onverantwoorde risico's worden genomen door machthebbers, en het ontwikkelen van interventies om deze te voorkomen.Show less
Research master thesis | Psychology (research) (MSc)
closed access
While the traditional bystander effect literature suggested that the presence of bystanders leads to less help provided to the victims, recent studies that focused on dangerous incidents provided...Show moreWhile the traditional bystander effect literature suggested that the presence of bystanders leads to less help provided to the victims, recent studies that focused on dangerous incidents provided evidence for decreased or even reversed bystander effect in the presence of bystanders. Although previous research proposed that the heightened arousal experienced by bystanders during dangerous incidents with in-group victims leads to increased assistance, empirical evidence supporting this claim remains limited and difficult to be studied with self-report measurements. This study addresses these limitations by employing the biopsychological model of challenge and threat (BPS-CT) to examine empirically the physiological reactions of bystanders. Participants were exposed to vignettes describing dangerous and non-dangerous incidents involving in-group and out-group victims, while their cardiovascular activity and blood pressure were measured. The presence of bystanders was found to have a marginal impact on reducing threat among bystanders, irrespective of the incident's severity. Moreover, in dangerous incidents, the presence of other bystanders and a shared in-group identity with the victim heightened participants' sense of challenge. The findings align with previous meta-analytic evidence, highlighting that bystanders are more likely to intervene in dangerous situations. The results are discussed and possible implications are proposed for designing intervention programs aimed at increasing bystander intervention rates.Show less
Research master thesis | Psychology (research) (MSc)
closed access
Negative social reactions to women’s sexual assault disclosure, including disbelief, victim-blaming, and negative character judgments have detrimental consequences for survivors’ mental and...Show moreNegative social reactions to women’s sexual assault disclosure, including disbelief, victim-blaming, and negative character judgments have detrimental consequences for survivors’ mental and physical health and willingness to report the assault. Negative social reactions to female sexual assault disclosure are more often shown by men than women. This effect may be stronger, the more men identify with their gender. Negative reactions to female sexual assault disclosure among men may correspond to possible consequences of two types of social identity threat that depend on gender identification levels. High-identified men may experience threat to the value of their group (value threat), and low-identified men may experience threat of being seen primarily in terms of their male group identity (categorization threat). In the present research, we investigated belief, fault attribution, trait ratings, perceived male heterogeneity, and perceived male stigma in response to women’s disclosure of being sexually assaulted, mugged, or in an accident with men among a mixed gender (Study 1; N = 139) and a male sample (Study 2; N = 79). Study 2 additionally assessed cardiovascular threat. Results indicated that men, compared to women, expressed less belief, higher fault attribution, more negative trait ratings, and more perceived male heterogeneity and male stigma. High-identified, compared to low-identified men, displayed more negative reactions, perceived more stigma against men, and perceived less male heterogeneity. This pattern was mostly reversed for women. Male gender identification was more strongly associated with negative trait judgments of women disclosing sexual assault compared to other experiences, especially regarding morality. Men exhibited higher cardiovascular threat levels when discussing women’s disclosure of sexual assault than of an accident. Contrary to our predictions, we did not find a mediation of social reactions through cardiovascular measures that was moderated by gender identification components. Across studies, men’s reactions were mostly consistent with social identity threat responses: High-identified men’s negative reactions and perceived male stigma indicated value threat, while low-identified men’s emphasis on male heterogeneity indicated categorization threat. Our results emphasize the value of a social identity threat perspective on social reactions to sexual assault disclosure and highlight potential for future investigations with cardiovascular threat measures.Show less
A recent line of research suggests that power might have different meanings to people. More in particular, researchers distinguish between power construed as responsibility and power construed as...Show moreA recent line of research suggests that power might have different meanings to people. More in particular, researchers distinguish between power construed as responsibility and power construed as an opportunity. Correlational research indicated that gender (identity) and, to a somewhat lesser extent, sex predict people’s power construal. The current study took an experimental approach to focus on gender differences in power construal, testing the hypotheses that a feminine gender identity is related to power construed as a responsibility and a masculine gender identity is related to power construed as an opportunity. First, participants described a situation in which they felt powerful (high power condition) or powerless (low power condition). Subsequently, we measured power construals and gender identity (TMF). This scale was a more modern and explicit measure of gender identity than similar assessments in prior research. Results indicated that femininity significantly predicted power construed as a responsibility, regardless of participants experiencing high- or low power. We found no evidence of biological sex or masculinity as predictor for power construal. Additionally, we controlled for possible confounding factors like power domain, stability of power and working field. However, the (combined) effect of sex and condition on power construal remained non-significant. Thus, the current research, making use of an experimental design, and different gender measure, found only weak evidence for a relation between gender and power construal. In conclusion, there might be stronger determinants of power construal than gender. This study discusses possible explanations and suggests alternatives for future research.Show less
Social Power is the relative control over the outcome of oneself and others (Fiske & Berdahl, 2007). Power can be interpreted differently, which in turn can have a big impact on the power...Show moreSocial Power is the relative control over the outcome of oneself and others (Fiske & Berdahl, 2007). Power can be interpreted differently, which in turn can have a big impact on the power holders and on the ones who experience the expressed power (Keltner et. al., 2003). The literature distinguishes between power as opportunity and power as responsibility (De Wit et al., 2017). Moreover, stereo- typical gender differences especially affect women as they keep them from reaching leadership pos- itions (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). However, not only gender affects behavior, also our socio-eco- nomic status can influences a life significantly. The change in socio-economic status is called social mobility (Reforms, 2010). A restricted social mobility seem to keep individuals from reaching lead- ership positions (Brown, 2013). Self-reports on power construal were collected with overall n= 227 respondents to find out about the possible differences in how men and women interpret power. The results show that self-identified females do interpret power more as responsibility than self-identi- fied males do. Both self-identified genders did not differ on construing power as opportunity. Fur- thermore, the study showed that social mobility has no effect on how power is interpreted. Never- theless, the current SES of an individual seems to have a small effect on how power is perceived. The current study highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between gender, so- cial mobility, and power construal and the necessity for further research.Show less
Literature has demonstrated that power can be construed as a responsibility or as an opportunity. However, a better understanding is needed on how gender roles influence power construal. This study...Show moreLiterature has demonstrated that power can be construed as a responsibility or as an opportunity. However, a better understanding is needed on how gender roles influence power construal. This study investigated whether diverse gender identities tend to construe power differently. Furthermore, it also explored whether culture orientation – individualism and collectivism – and socioeconomic status influence the relationship between gender and power construal. It was hypothesized that: gender would not influence power construal; that individualism predicts power construed as an opportunity, and collectivism as a responsibility; and finally, that higher scores in objective and subjective measures of socioeconomic status led to power appraised as an opportunity. To test these hypotheses, gender was measured with a continuous variable. Culture orientation was assessed with four dimensions of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Lastly, objective and subjective socioeconomic status was measured by age, education, household income, and by the MacArthur Scale of Subjective Social Status. The results demonstrated that a stronger feminine identification was associated with a stronger tendency to construe power as a responsibility. Findings concerning culture orientation and socioeconomic status confirmed the predictions. Age was also revealed as a significant predictor of power as an opportunity. The results regarding gender were interpreted in terms of social identification. Results on culture and socioeconomic status were discussed in terms of how these constructs serve as relevant social identities influencing the construal of power. Although more research is needed, the results highlight the importance of assuming power construal within specific social and economic contexts.Show less
Power is not merely a structural or relational construct but also a psychological state; power influences the way an individual is inclined to act, treat others, and to make decisions. Power can be...Show morePower is not merely a structural or relational construct but also a psychological state; power influences the way an individual is inclined to act, treat others, and to make decisions. Power can be construed as a responsibility or as an opportunity and the specific construal of power determines the eventual action a powerholder will take. When it comes to positions of power, there is no shortage of individuals at powerful positions who exhibit narcissistic personality traits. This research aims to investigate the influence that narcissistic personality traits, in combination with gender, have on the construal of power. To investigate this relation the following hypothesis was formulated: Male leaders with stronger narcissistic personality traits will construe their power in an opportunistic manner significantly more than female leaders with stronger narcissistic personality traits and male leaders with low narcissistic personality traits. 250 participants with leadership positions were surveyed on gender, power construal and narcissistic traits. Results showed that narcissistic personality traits have a significant, positive effect on the construal of power as opportunity and a significant, negative effect on the construal of power as responsibility. The effect of gender was not found in this study. The results are discussed in terms of the current research and suggestions for the future. This study demonstrates that powerholders with higher narcissistic traits are more likely to interpret their power as opportunity, and less likely to interpret their power as responsibility, regardless of gender.Show less
