Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2019, Vol. 27 Issue (3) : 447-452     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00447
Research Reports |
The influence of power on choice deferral
LI Xiao-Ming1,2(),JIANG Song-Yuan
1 Cognition and Human Behavior Key Laboratory of Hunan Province
2 Department of Psychology, Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, China
Download: PDF(512 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks     Supporting Info
Guide   
Abstract  

The present study aimed at exploring the role of power in choice deferral (a subcategory of decision avoidance) by studying the moderating role of choice difficulty (Experiment 1) and the mediating role of decision process (Experiment 2). The results showed that choice difficulty can moderate the effect of power on choice deferral, when there is not a dominating option in the choice options, preference for deferral is more pronounced for powerless individuals than for powerful individuals. Additionally, the variance in the proportion of time spent on each attribute mediated the effect of power on choice deferral. The results indicated that lower power can lead to more choice of deferral options (especially in difficult decisions), and decision processing may play an important role in the effect of power on choice deferral.

Keywords power      choice deferral      choice difficulty      decision process      MouselabWeb procedure     
ZTFLH:  B849:C91  
Corresponding Authors: Xiao-Ming LI     E-mail: lixiaoming-2007@sohu.com
Issue Date: 22 January 2019
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Xiao-Ming LI
Song-Yuan JIANG
Cite this article:   
Xiao-Ming LI,Song-Yuan JIANG. The influence of power on choice deferral[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(3): 447-452.
URL:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00447     OR     http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/Y2019/V27/I3/447
决策难度 权力状态
高权力 低权力
高难度 3 (10%) 12 (40 %)
低难度 5 (16.67%) 4 (13.33%)
  
各测量指标 高权力 低权力 t p d
加工总
时间(s)
26.20 ± 14.91 38.81 ± 18.41 3.18 0.002 0.76
加工深度 0.66 ± 0.21 0.86 ± 0.16 4.50 0.000 1.08
加工模式 -0.03 ± 0.37 0.21 ± 0.35 2.88 0.005 0.69
加工变异性 0.15 ± 0.10 0.09 ± 0.05 3.17 0.002 0.76
困难指数 5.06 ± 1.49 5.92 ± 1.44 2.49 0.015 0.60
愉悦度 5.20 ± 0.96 5.40 ± 1.40 0.72 0.474 --
  
[1] 管延华, 迟毓凯, 戴金浩 . ( 2014). 权力对风险决策偏好的影响. 心理研究, 7( 4), 42-47.
url: http://www.cqvip.com/QK/88887X/201404/661995518.html
[2] 李晓明, 谢佳 . ( 2012). 偶然情绪对延迟选择的影响机制. 心理学报, 44( 12), 1641-1650.
[3] 钟毅平, 陈潇, 颜小聪 . ( 2013). 个体权力高低对其损失规避的影响. 心理科学, 36( 2), 429- 433.
url: http://www.cqvip.com/QK/95682A/201302/45077706.html
[4] Anderson C.J . ( 2003). The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychological Bulletin, 129( 1), 139-167.
pmid: 12555797 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.139
[5] Dhar R. ( 1996). The effect of decision strategy on the decision to defer choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9( 4), 265-281.
url: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/%28ISSN%291099-0771
[6] Dhar R., & Nowlis S.M . ( 1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25( 4), 369-384.
url: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/jcr/25/4
[7] Fast N. J., Sivanathan N., Mayer N. D., & Galinsky A. D . ( 2012). Power and overconfident decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117( 2), 249-260.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749597811001361
[8] Galinsky A.D., Gruenfeld D.H, & Magee J.C . ( 2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85( 3), 453-466.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453
[9] Galinsky A. D., Magee J. C., Gruenfeld D. H., Whitson J. A., & Liljenquist K. A . ( 2008). Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95( 6), 1450-1466.
pmid: 19025295 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0012633
[10] Hiemer J., & Abele A.E . ( 2012). High power = motivation? Low power = situation? The impact of power, power stability and power motivation on risk-taking. Personality and Individual Differences, 53( 4), 486-490.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0191886912001730
[11] Joshi P.D., & Fast N.J . ( 2013). Power and reduced temporal discounting. Psychological Science, 24( 4), 432-438.
pmid: 23404083 url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797612457950
[12] Keltner D., Gruenfeld D. H., & Anderson C . ( 2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110( 2), 265-284.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.265
[13] Krijnen J. M. T., Zeelenberg M., & Breugelmans S. M . ( 2015). Decision importance as a cue for deferral. Judgment and Decision Making, 10( 5), 407-415.
[14] Lammers J., Dubois D., Rucker D. D., & Galinsky A. D . ( 2013). Power gets the job: Priming power improves interview outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49( 4), 776-779.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S002210311300036X
[15] Lange J. & Krahé B. , ( 2014). The effects of information form and domain-specific knowledge on choice deferral. Journal of Economic Psychology, 43( 3), 92-104.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167487014000361
[16] , Magee J.C., & Galinsky A.D . ( 2008). 8 social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2( 1), 351-398.
url: http://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/19416520802211628
[17] Magee J.C., & Smith P.K . ( 2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17( 2), 158-186.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1088868312472732
[18] Maner J. K., Gailliot M. T Menzel A. J. & Kunstman J. W. ., ( 2012). Dispositional anxiety blocks the psychological effects of power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38( 11), 1383-1395.
pmid: 22854791 url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167212453341
[19] Miyamoto Y., & Ji L.J . ( 2011). Power fosters context- independent, analytic cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37( 11), 1449-1458.
pmid: 21653580 url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167211411485
[20] Preacher K.J., & Hayes A.F . ( 2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40( 3), 879-891.
pmid: 18697684 url: http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
[21] Rassin E., Muris P., Booster E., & Kolsloot I . ( 2008). Indecisiveness and informational tunnel vision. Personality and Individual Differences, 45( 1), 96-102.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0191886908000962
[22] Rucker D. D., Galinsky A. D., & Dubois D . ( 2012). Power and consumer behavior: How power shapes who and what consumers value. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22( 3), 352-368.
url: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.001
[23] Smith P. K., Dijksterhuis A & Wigboldus D. H. J. ., ( 2008). Powerful people make good decisions even when they consciously think. Psychological Science, 19( 12), 1258-1259.
pmid: 19121134 url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02207.x
[24] Smith P.K., & Trope Y. , ( 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.
pmid: 16649856 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578
[25] Tversky A.& Shafir E. ,( 1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3( 6), 358-361.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00047.x
[1] WANG Honglei, SUN Jianmin. The negative effects of empowering leadership: Theoretical mechanisms and boundary conditions[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(5): 858-870.
[2] Xia WU,Chupeng ZHONG,Yulong DING,Zhe QU. Application of time-frequency analysis in investigating non-phase locked components of EEG[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(8): 1349-1364.
[3] CHENG Nanhua, LI Zhanxing, ZHU Liqi.  Children’s understanding of social power and its relationship with social behavior[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(2): 283-293.
[4] JIANG Hongyan, LIU Bangshun, SUN Peizhen.  The influence of power on consumer behavior and its theoretical explanation[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(1): 156-168.
[5] JIN Jian; LI Ye; CHEN Dongming; GUO Kaijiao. Effects and mechanisms of power and status on self-interested behavior[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(5): 878-886.
[6] WANG Hao; YU Guoliang. Power cognitions in intimate relationship[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(4): 639-651.
[7] SONG Yunqiang; XU Ruiheng; XING Cai. Risk-sensitivity theory: Need motivates risky decision-making[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(3): 486-499.
[8] SUN Hongri, PRATTO Felicia.  Power Basis Theory: A kind of power corresponding to survival needs[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(11): 1982-1991.
[9] YAN Yu; HE Yanan. The role leaders’ perception to employee voice behavior motives: An attribution theory-based review[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(9): 1457-1466.
[10] CAI Wei; WU Song; KOU Yu. Power and prosocial behaviour: How and why power affects prosocial behaviour[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(1): 120-131.
[11] WEI Xuhua; LIU Yongmei; CHEN Sixuan. Organizational Hierarchy: Basic Concepts and Mechanisms[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(8): 1467-1479.
[12] DUAN Jinyun; LU Zhiwei; SHEN Yanhan. Power in Organization: Concepts, Theories and Effects[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(6): 1070-1078.
[13] ZHAN Xiaojun; LI Zhicheng; LIANG Xuejiao. Customer Mistreatment: Conceptualization, Measurement and Nomological Network[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(4): 690-701.
[14] WEI Zi-Han, LI Xingshan. Decision Process Tracing: Evidence from Eye-movement Data[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(12): 2029-2041.
[15] CAI Lin;ZHANG Yaxu. EEG Time-Frequency Analysis of Syntactic and Semantic Processing in Sentence Comprehension[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(7): 1112-1121.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech