ISSN 1671-3710
CN 11-4766/R
主办:中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理科学进展 ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 274-290.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2025.0274

• 元分析 • 上一篇    下一篇

权力接近-抑制行为理论:基于元分析的理论拓展

卫旭华, 焦文颖   

  1. 兰州大学管理学院, 兰州 730000
  • 收稿日期:2024-06-04 出版日期:2025-02-15 发布日期:2024-12-06
  • 通讯作者: 焦文颖, E-mail: 542578717@qq.com.cn
  • 基金资助:
    * 国家自然科学基金项目(71972093, 72372063); 甘肃省哲学社会科学规划项目(2023YB013); 兰州大学中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金项目(2023jbkyzx005)

The behavioral theory of approach-inhibition of power: Theoretical expansion based on a meta-analysis

WEI Xuhua, JIAO Wenying   

  1. School of Management, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
  • Received:2024-06-04 Online:2025-02-15 Published:2024-12-06

摘要: 权力接近-抑制行为理论是解释权力和行为关系的重要理论, 但应用该理论的实证研究却存在与理论相矛盾的结论。通过对2003~2023年探索权力与接近和抑制行为关系的154篇文献、245个实证样本的261个效应值的元分析整合, 本研究检验了权力与接近-抑制行为关系的双刃剑作用机制及边界条件, 以期解释以往研究结论不一致的原因。结果显示权力与接近-抑制行为的关系具有双刃剑效应, 客观权力既会通过主观权力间接增加接近行为并减少抑制行为, 也会对抑制行为产生直接的促进作用, 且主观权力对行为的解释力强于客观权力。调节效应结果显示, 权力距离能够加强主观权力对接近行为的正向影响, 并强化主观权力对抑制行为的负向影响。上述结论有助于深化和拓展权力接近-抑制行为理论框架。

关键词: 权力, 权力接近-抑制理论, 元分析, 接近行为, 抑制行为

Abstract: The power approach-inhibition theory is an important theory for explaining the power-behavior relationship, but empirical studies applying the theory have findings that contradict the theory. Differences in the conceptualization of power in previous studies and differences in the power distance of the study samples may account for the existence of inconsistent findings. Therefore, this study uses a meta-analytic approach to explore whether there are differences in the magnitude of the effects of subjective and objective power on approach and inhibition behaviors and the mechanisms of influence, and by exploring possible boundary conditions (i.e., power distances) it attempts to explain the emergence of inconsistent conclusions in previous studies.
By integrating a meta-analysis of 154 literatures and 261 effect sizes from 245 empirical samples exploring the relationship between power and approach and inhibition behavior from 2003~2023, this study examined the mechanism of the double-edged sword effect of the power and approach-inhibition behavior relationship and the boundary conditions. The results showed that the power and approach-inhibition behavior relationship had a double-edged sword effect, with objective power indirectly increasing approach and decreasing inhibition through subjective power, as well as directly contributing to inhibition, and with subjective power having a stronger explanatory power for behavior than objective power. The moderating effect results showed that power distance strengthened the positive effect of subjective power on approach behavior and the negative effect of subjective power on inhibition behavior.
There are several innovations and contributions to this study. First, this study expands the real relationship between different types of power and behavior by distinguishing the different effects of subjective and objective power on approach and inhibition behaviors and clarifying the difference in the explanatory power of subjective and objective power on the two types of behaviors. That is, whether it is approach or inhibition behaviors, the explanatory power of subjective power on the behaviors is stronger than that of objective power. The relevant propositions of the power approach-inhibition behavior theory are verified and expanded. Second, this study explores the differences in the mechanisms by which subjective and objective power affects behavior, which explains to some extent the inconsistencies in the findings of previous studies. The results of this study illustrate that objective power needs to indirectly increase approach behavior and decrease inhibition behavior through subjective power, and after controlling for this indirect path, the direct effect of objective power on approach behavior is insignificant, and it positively contributes to inhibition behavior. In other words, when objective power is perceived subjectively (i.e., perceived objective power or activated objective power by external power), the individual's subjective perception of his or her ability to influence others or the environment is activated based on the resources he or she possesses, which increases approach behaviors and decreases inhibition behaviors. When objective power is not perceived (i.e., potential objective power or inactivated objective power), even if objective power is high, the individual's subjective sense of power is still low, and the individual may not perceive himself or herself as a high-power person due to a lack of self-perception, and thus may not engage in approach behaviors or decrease inhibition behaviors. In addition, when individuals have low objective power but high subjective power perceptions (i.e., intrinsic power perceptions), they still exhibit high approach behaviors and low inhibition behaviors because they influence or control others based on their intrinsic self-perceptions and beliefs that they are high power. This finding not only confirms the existence of differences between subjective and objective power in the application of the theory, but also highlights the necessity and importance of distinguishing between these two types of power within the framework of the theory. Finally, this study extends the boundary conditions of the theory by finding the moderating role of power distance between subjective power and approach or inhibition behavior.

Key words: power, approach-inhibition theory of power, meta-analysis, approach behavior, inhibition behavior