Please wait a minute...
心理学报
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
权力感对个体的影响:调节定向的视角
杨文琪1; 李 强1; 郭名扬2; 范 谦2; 何伊丽3
(1南开大学周恩来政府管理学院, 天津 300350) (2北京师范大学心理学院, 北京 100875) (3东莞理工学院城市学院财经系, 广东 东莞 523419)
The effects of power on human behavior: The perspective of regulatory focus
YANG Wenqi1; LI Qiang1; GUO Mingyang2; FAN Qian2; HE Yili3
(1 Zhou Enlai School of Government, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China) (2 School of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China) (3 Department of Finance and Economics, City College of Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan 523419, China)
全文: PDF(554 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

采用4个研究探究了权力感对调节定向的影响。研究1通过测量被试的特质性权力感和特质性调节定向初步探索权力感水平与调节定向的关系。研究2和研究3分别通过外显角色扮演和故事回忆法来探究状态性权力感对调节定向目标表征和策略选择的影响。研究4采用身体姿势法启动权力感, 进一步探究在内隐层面权力感对调节定向的影响。结果发现, 高权力感个体更倾向于促进定向; 而低权力感个体更倾向于预防定向, 并且排除了其中可能的无关变量(情绪)的影响。本研究有助于更好地理解和整合现有的权力感研究结果, 并能预测更多未知的权力感效应。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
杨文琪
李强
郭名扬
范谦
何伊丽
关键词 权力感 调节定向 促进定向 预防定向    
Abstract

Research on power has been going on for decades and it has been found to have considerable effects on cognitive, emotional and behavior aspects. This article presents an integrative theory accounting of the effects of power on humans. In particular, high power means the ability to control others and to get rid of the control of others, powerful individuals have the ability to fill with one's will, as a consequence, triggers promotion-related goal and strategy. In contrast, low power is associated with no ability to control others and get rid of the control of others and thereby activates prevention-related goal and strategy. This framework allows us to integrate disparate literatures and to generate a significant number of novel hypotheses about the consequences of power. In order to empirically verify the hypotheses mentioned, 4 studies are presented to explore the influence of power (high or low) on regulatory focus (promotion or prevention). Study 1 investigated the relationship between trait power and chronic regulatory focus. Results showed that the powerful, compared to the powerless participants, were more likely to promotion focus. Study 2-4 investigated the effects of priming power on situated regulatory focus. In Study 2, after role playing of manipulating power, the accessibility to ideals and duties to goal were measured. Results showed that powerful participants showed greater accessibility to their ideals while powerless participants showed greater accessibility to their duties. In Study 3, after recalling manipulating sense of personal power, the accessibility to eager and vigilant of strategy were measured. Results showed that powerful participants showed greater eager strategy while powerless participants showed greater vigilant strategy. In Study 4, we priming power with gesture implicitly, then measured participants' strategy in the same way with Study 3. Results showed that powerful participants showed greater eager strategy while powerless participants showed greater vigilant strategy. We also showed that this effect occurred as a consequence of the level of power rather than as an incidental result of a change in mood. In short, the results indicated that individuals with high power are more likely to promotion focus and individuals with low power tend to prevention focus. The results of these four studies provided supports for our theorizing: (1) individuals with high power are more likely to promotion focus, whereas those in low power tend more to prevention focus. (2) The regulatory focus effect of power occurred as a consequence of the level of power rather than as an incidental result of a change in mood. The importance of these results is discussed in line with recent theorizing within social psychology of power. We propose a new means to broaden the understanding of effect of power, which enriches the relevant research on power. In addition, the result is a beneficial supplement to Approach-Inhibition Theory of power.

Key wordspower    regulatory focus    promotion focus    prevention focus
收稿日期: 2016-07-11      出版日期: 2017-03-25
基金资助:

国家社科基金重大招标项目(12&ZD218)资助。

通讯作者: 李强, E-mail: liqiangp@126.com   
引用本文:   
杨文琪;李强;郭名扬;范谦;何伊丽. 权力感对个体的影响:调节定向的视角[J]. 心理学报, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00404.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2017/V49/I3/404
[1] 黄敏学;王艺婷; 廖俊云;刘茂红. 评论不一致性对消费者的双面影响:产品属性与调节定向的调节[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(3): 370-382.
[2] 靳菲; 朱华伟;. 消费者的权力感与冲动购买[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 880-890.
[3] 杜晓梦;赵占波;崔晓. 评论效价、新产品类型与调节定向对在线评论有用性的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(4): 555-568.
[4] 汪涛;谢志鹏;崔楠. 和品牌聊聊天 —— 拟人化沟通对消费者品牌态度影响[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(7): 987-999.
[5] 段锦云;黄彩云. 个人权力感对进谏行为的影响机制:权力认知的视角[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(2): 217-230.
[6] 李小平,杨晟宇,李梦遥. 权威人格与权力感对道德思维方式的影响[J]. , 2012, 44(7): 964-971.
[7] 汪玲,林晖芸,逄晓鸣. 特质性与情境性调节定向匹配效应的一致性[J]. , 2011, 43(05): 553-560.
[8] 姚琦,马华维,乐国安. 期望与绩效的关系: 调节定向的调节作用[J]. , 2010, 42(06): 704-714.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn