Advances in Psychological Science ›› 2025, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 274-290.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2025.0274
• Meta-Analysis • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:
2024-06-04
Online:
2025-02-15
Published:
2024-12-06
Contact:
JIAO Wenying
E-mail:542578717@qq.com.cn
CLC Number:
WEI Xuhua, JIAO Wenying. The behavioral theory of approach-inhibition of power: Theoretical expansion based on a meta-analysis[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2025, 33(2): 274-290.
客观权力 | 主观权力 | |
---|---|---|
基本属性 | 客观 | 主观 |
来源 | 职位 | 心理感受 |
实质 | 真实、客观所拥有的权力 | 对自己是否有影响力的主观认知 |
是否真实拥有权力 | 是 | 不一定 |
举例 | CEO权力 | 个人权力感 |
客观权力 | 主观权力 | |
---|---|---|
基本属性 | 客观 | 主观 |
来源 | 职位 | 心理感受 |
实质 | 真实、客观所拥有的权力 | 对自己是否有影响力的主观认知 |
是否真实拥有权力 | 是 | 不一定 |
举例 | CEO权力 | 个人权力感 |
变量 | 定义 | 具体变量 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
权力 | 客观权力 | 个体处于组织中的层级或位置所赋予的、表明个体真实、客观所拥有的权力 | 职位权力、组织层级、领导级别、高管权力、CEO权力、管理层权力 | |
主观权力 | 个体对权力的一种主观感受和体验, 是个体在感知层面对自身能够影响他人能力的一种心理认知 | 个人权力感、权力感状态、权力感知、奖赏权、参考权、强制权、专家权、相对权力 | ||
行为 | 接近行为 | 能够帮助个体获得与奖励和机会相关的目标的行为 | 积极:在为自己谋利的同时不会损害他人利益, 符合社会规范 | 主动行为、建言、尽职行为、目标承诺、创新、反馈寻求行为、知识分享、合作行为、团结行为、风险承担、组织公民行为(OCB)、任务导向的领导行为、工作重塑、目标导向的行为、道德型领导、冒险行为、炫耀性亲社会行为、培训绩效不佳者、实施人际公平性、企业环保投入、建议寻求、建言采纳、观点采择 |
消极:采取激进手段, 往往伴随着损害他人利益和违反社会规范 | 竞争行为、支配式冲突管理行为、不诚实行为、攻击行为、道德伪善、自利行为、亲组织不道德行为、自我服务行为、自我推销撒谎、腐败行为、过度投资、过度并购、反生产行为、欺骗行为、冲突行为、不道德行为、辱虐型领导、组织偏离行为 | |||
抑制行为 | 包括个体的警惕行为、检查惩罚情况、回避和抑制反应等一系列与惩罚和威胁信号有关的行为 | 积极:通过关心和关注他人表现出利他倾向 | 人本导向、亲社会行为、利他行为、捐赠行为、信任行为、亲群体行为、帮助行为、道德谴责、领导者自我牺牲、关注他人的取向、共生行为、补偿绩效不佳者 | |
消极:通过回避和退缩等被动方式进行应对 | 消极怠工、回避行为、拒绝绩效不佳者、顺从式冲突管理行为、沉默、退出行为、顺从行为、退缩行为 |
变量 | 定义 | 具体变量 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
权力 | 客观权力 | 个体处于组织中的层级或位置所赋予的、表明个体真实、客观所拥有的权力 | 职位权力、组织层级、领导级别、高管权力、CEO权力、管理层权力 | |
主观权力 | 个体对权力的一种主观感受和体验, 是个体在感知层面对自身能够影响他人能力的一种心理认知 | 个人权力感、权力感状态、权力感知、奖赏权、参考权、强制权、专家权、相对权力 | ||
行为 | 接近行为 | 能够帮助个体获得与奖励和机会相关的目标的行为 | 积极:在为自己谋利的同时不会损害他人利益, 符合社会规范 | 主动行为、建言、尽职行为、目标承诺、创新、反馈寻求行为、知识分享、合作行为、团结行为、风险承担、组织公民行为(OCB)、任务导向的领导行为、工作重塑、目标导向的行为、道德型领导、冒险行为、炫耀性亲社会行为、培训绩效不佳者、实施人际公平性、企业环保投入、建议寻求、建言采纳、观点采择 |
消极:采取激进手段, 往往伴随着损害他人利益和违反社会规范 | 竞争行为、支配式冲突管理行为、不诚实行为、攻击行为、道德伪善、自利行为、亲组织不道德行为、自我服务行为、自我推销撒谎、腐败行为、过度投资、过度并购、反生产行为、欺骗行为、冲突行为、不道德行为、辱虐型领导、组织偏离行为 | |||
抑制行为 | 包括个体的警惕行为、检查惩罚情况、回避和抑制反应等一系列与惩罚和威胁信号有关的行为 | 积极:通过关心和关注他人表现出利他倾向 | 人本导向、亲社会行为、利他行为、捐赠行为、信任行为、亲群体行为、帮助行为、道德谴责、领导者自我牺牲、关注他人的取向、共生行为、补偿绩效不佳者 | |
消极:通过回避和退缩等被动方式进行应对 | 消极怠工、回避行为、拒绝绩效不佳者、顺从式冲突管理行为、沉默、退出行为、顺从行为、退缩行为 |
变量 | k | N | r | ρ | 95%置信区间 | 80%可信区间 | QW | I2 | 失安全 系数 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | 低 | 高 | ||||||||
接近行为 | 193 | 48551 | 0.171 | 0.204*** | 0.165 | 0.242 | −0.143 | 0.506 | 3749.252*** | 94.879% | 8620 |
积极 | 113 | 30561 | 0.180 | 0.213*** | 0.164 | 0.261 | −0.120 | 0.503 | 2159.683*** | 94.814% | 25024 |
消极 | 80 | 17990 | 0.113 | 0.192*** | 0.129 | 0.254 | −0.171 | 0.509 | 1508.570*** | 94.763% | 6971 |
抑制行为 | 68 | 16734 | −0.113 | −0.141*** | −0.200 | −0.081 | −0.425 | 0.169 | 1023.842*** | 93.456% | 2780 |
积极 | 41 | 9350 | −0.058 | −0.074† | −0.152 | 0.004 | −0.368 | 0.233 | 567.152*** | 92.947% | 139 |
消极 | 27 | 7384 | −0.194 | −0.237*** | −0.316 | −0.156 | −0.474 | 0.031 | 339.266*** | 92.336% | 1750 |
变量 | k | N | r | ρ | 95%置信区间 | 80%可信区间 | QW | I2 | 失安全 系数 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | 低 | 高 | ||||||||
接近行为 | 193 | 48551 | 0.171 | 0.204*** | 0.165 | 0.242 | −0.143 | 0.506 | 3749.252*** | 94.879% | 8620 |
积极 | 113 | 30561 | 0.180 | 0.213*** | 0.164 | 0.261 | −0.120 | 0.503 | 2159.683*** | 94.814% | 25024 |
消极 | 80 | 17990 | 0.113 | 0.192*** | 0.129 | 0.254 | −0.171 | 0.509 | 1508.570*** | 94.763% | 6971 |
抑制行为 | 68 | 16734 | −0.113 | −0.141*** | −0.200 | −0.081 | −0.425 | 0.169 | 1023.842*** | 93.456% | 2780 |
积极 | 41 | 9350 | −0.058 | −0.074† | −0.152 | 0.004 | −0.368 | 0.233 | 567.152*** | 92.947% | 139 |
消极 | 27 | 7384 | −0.194 | −0.237*** | −0.316 | −0.156 | −0.474 | 0.031 | 339.266*** | 92.336% | 1750 |
路径 | k | N | r | ρ | 95%置信区间 | 80%可信区间 | QW | I2 | 失安全 系数 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | 低 | 高 | ||||||||
客观权力→接近行为 | 39 | 12599 | 0.089 | 0.093*** | 0.045 | 0.140 | −0.086 | 0.266 | 274.556*** | 86.159% | 910 |
客观权力→抑制行为 | 5 | 2708 | 0.076 | 0.088** | 0.023 | 0.152 | 0.161 | 0.553 | 10.793* | 62.940% | 15 |
主观权力→接近行为 | 154 | 35952 | 0.193 | 0.233*** | 0.186 | 0.279 | −0.147 | 0.553 | 3309.460*** | 95.377% | 4672 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 63 | 14026 | −0.130 | −0.160*** | −0.222 | −0.097 | −0.446 | 0.156 | 897.761*** | 93.094% | 3270 |
路径 | k | N | r | ρ | 95%置信区间 | 80%可信区间 | QW | I2 | 失安全 系数 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | 低 | 高 | ||||||||
客观权力→接近行为 | 39 | 12599 | 0.089 | 0.093*** | 0.045 | 0.140 | −0.086 | 0.266 | 274.556*** | 86.159% | 910 |
客观权力→抑制行为 | 5 | 2708 | 0.076 | 0.088** | 0.023 | 0.152 | 0.161 | 0.553 | 10.793* | 62.940% | 15 |
主观权力→接近行为 | 154 | 35952 | 0.193 | 0.233*** | 0.186 | 0.279 | −0.147 | 0.553 | 3309.460*** | 95.377% | 4672 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 63 | 14026 | −0.130 | −0.160*** | −0.222 | −0.097 | −0.446 | 0.156 | 897.761*** | 93.094% | 3270 |
权力类型 | 接近行为 | 抑制行为 |
---|---|---|
客观权力 | 10.57% | 33.83% |
主观权力 | 89.43% | 66.17% |
合计 | 100% | 100% |
权力类型 | 接近行为 | 抑制行为 |
---|---|---|
客观权力 | 10.57% | 33.83% |
主观权力 | 89.43% | 66.17% |
合计 | 100% | 100% |
变量 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. 客观权力 | 1 | |||
2. 主观权力(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.393, 0.424 (9, 2404) [0.300, 0.548] | 1 | ||
3. 接近行为(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.087, 0.094 (39, 12599) [0.049, 0.139] | 0.178, 0.205 (154, 35952) [0.163, 0.247] | 1 | |
4. 抑制行为(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.070, 0.077 (5, 2708) [0.022, 0.131] | −0.118, −0.140 (63, 14026) [−0.199, −0.081] | −0.160, −0.181 (20, 5696) [−0.362, −0.001] | 1 |
变量 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. 客观权力 | 1 | |||
2. 主观权力(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.393, 0.424 (9, 2404) [0.300, 0.548] | 1 | ||
3. 接近行为(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.087, 0.094 (39, 12599) [0.049, 0.139] | 0.178, 0.205 (154, 35952) [0.163, 0.247] | 1 | |
4. 抑制行为(r, ρ) (k, N) 95% CI | 0.070, 0.077 (5, 2708) [0.022, 0.131] | −0.118, −0.140 (63, 14026) [−0.199, −0.081] | −0.160, −0.181 (20, 5696) [−0.362, −0.001] | 1 |
路径关系 | 间接效应 | 标准误 | 95%蒙特卡洛置信区间 |
---|---|---|---|
H2a:客观权力→主观权力→接近行为 | 0.088 | 0.007 | [0.075, 0.101] |
H2b:客观权力→主观权力→抑制行为 | −0.089 | 0.007 | [−0.103, −0.076] |
路径关系 | 间接效应 | 标准误 | 95%蒙特卡洛置信区间 |
---|---|---|---|
H2a:客观权力→主观权力→接近行为 | 0.088 | 0.007 | [0.075, 0.101] |
H2b:客观权力→主观权力→抑制行为 | −0.089 | 0.007 | [−0.103, −0.076] |
调节变量 | 变量关系 | k | β | 标准误 | 95%置信区间 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | |||||
权力距离 | 主观权力→接近行为 | 145 | 0.004*** | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 59 | −0.003* | 0.001 | −0.005 | −0.0003 |
调节变量 | 变量关系 | k | β | 标准误 | 95%置信区间 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | |||||
权力距离 | 主观权力→接近行为 | 145 | 0.004*** | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 59 | −0.003* | 0.001 | −0.005 | −0.0003 |
调节变量 | 变量关系 | k | β | 标准误 | 95%置信区间 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | |||||
权力距离 | 主观权力→接近行为 | 143 | 0.083* | 0.042 | 0.001 | 0.165 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 59 | −0.003* | 0.001 | −0.005 | −0.0003 |
调节变量 | 变量关系 | k | β | 标准误 | 95%置信区间 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
低 | 高 | |||||
权力距离 | 主观权力→接近行为 | 143 | 0.083* | 0.042 | 0.001 | 0.165 |
主观权力→抑制行为 | 59 | −0.003* | 0.001 | −0.005 | −0.0003 |
注:*表示该文献被用于元分析。 | |
[1] | 包艳, 马伟博, 赵海涛. (2023). 领导成员交换关系差异对团队绩效的影响: 团队情绪抑制氛围与领导权力感的作用. 中国人力资源开发, 40(8), 67-81. |
[2] | * 蔡一鸣. (2019). 权力感和道德自我形象对亲社会行为的影响 [硕士学位论文]. 暨南大学, 广州. |
[3] | * 陈超宇. (2023). 权力对建议采纳的影响机制 [硕士学位论文]. 天津大学. |
[4] | * 陈明淑, 陆擎涛. (2019). 员工助人行为与工作幸福感关系研究——以团队凝聚力为调节. 贵州财经大学学报, (5), 54-64. |
[5] | * 陈秋菊. (2021). 权力感和权力距离信念对攻击行为的影响 [硕士学位论文]. 华东师范大学, 上海. |
[6] | * 陈天华. (2021). 地位威胁对员工亲组织不道德行为的影响 [硕士学位论文]. 兰州大学. |
[7] | * 段锦云, 黄彩云. (2013). 个人权力感对进谏行为的影响机制:权力认知的视角. 心理学报, 45(2), 217-230. |
[8] | * 段锦云, 凌斌, 王雨晨. (2013). 组织类型与员工建言行为的关系探索: 基于权力的视角. 应用心理学, 19(2), 152-162. |
[9] | * 樊耘, 陈倩倩, 吕霄. (2015). LMX对员工反馈寻求行为的影响机制研究——基于分配公平和权力感知的视角. 科学学与科学技术管理, 36(10), 158-168. |
[10] | * 高中华, 丁佳琦, 徐燕, 刘琪. (2022). 公平领导行为对员工知识共享行为的影响机制——基于地位竞争动机的中介作用和个体相对剥夺感的调节作用. 技术经济, 41(6), 164-175. |
[11] | * 郭亚康. (2020). 权力感与道德认同对道德伪善的影响 [硕士学位论文]. 山东师范大学, 济南. |
[12] | * 焦学赛, 于海云. (2024). 技术过载对员工创新行为的影响研究——基于工作倦怠的中介作用和授权型领导的调节作用. 经营与管理, (7), 152-160. |
[13] | * 李旭洋. (2017). 环境不确定性、高管权力与风险承担 [硕士学位论文]. 内蒙古大学, 呼和浩特. |
[14] | * 李艺玮. (2022). 媒体关注、管理层权力与企业环保投入——基于重污染行业上市公司的实证研究. 商业会计, (3), 33-38. |
[15] | * 梁子笑. (2022). 员工绩效对建言行为的影响研究 [硕士学位论文]. 浙江工商大学, 杭州. |
[16] | * 刘凡, 郑鸽, 赵玉芳. (2018). 权力对压力应对行为倾向的影响:认知评估的中介作用. 心理科学, 41(4), 890-896. |
[17] | * 刘明伟, 王华英, 李铭泽. (2020). 自以为是所以主动改变?员工自恋与主动变革行为的关系研究. 中国人力资源开发, 37(2), 21-33. |
[18] | * 刘明霞, 徐心吾. (2021). 真实型领导、主管认同与员工知识共享行为:程序公平的调节作用. 湖南大学学报(社会科学版), 35(1), 45-53. |
[19] | * 刘善仕, 玉胜贤, 刘嫦娥. (2024). 投桃报李:临时员工助人行为对正式员工隐性知识分享的影响机制. 商业经济与管理, (6), 54-67. |
[20] | * 刘松博, 程进凯, 马晓颖. (2023). 资质过剩感对员工组织公民行为的正面影响——领导涌现的中介作用. 软科学, 37(4), 101-108. |
[21] | * 刘小庆. (2016). 权力对员工沉默的接近—抑制效应 [硕士学位论文]. 华中师范大学, 武汉. |
[22] | * 罗远淑. (2021). 敬畏对不诚实行为的影响:权力感的中介作用 [硕士学位论文]. 四川师范大学, 成都. |
[23] | * 骆皓爽, 何雪菲, 王晓庄. (2016). 绩效考核满意度对工作退缩行为的影响:有调节的中介效应. 心理与行为研究, 14(6), 817-825. |
[24] | * 马金城, 张力丹, 罗巧艳. (2017). 管理层权力、自由现金流量与过度并购——基于沪深上市公司并购数据的实证研究. 宏观经济研究, (9), 31-40. |
[25] | * 马静. (2020). 员工组织地位与其态度和行为关系:有调节的中介作用 [硕士学位论文]. 河南大学, 开封. |
[26] | * 孟庆飞. (2015). 员工个人权力感知对其工作表现的影响机制研究 [硕士学位论文]. 河南大学, 开封. |
[27] | * 牛楠, 刘兵, 李嫄. (2020). 边界管理者权力感对团队冲突管理行为的影响研究. 现代财经(天津财经大学学报), 40(7), 71-84. |
[28] | * 容琰, 杨百寅, 隋杨. (2016). 权力感对员工建言行为的影响——自我验证机制的作用. 科学学与科学技术管理, 37(10), 119-129. |
[29] | * 申晨, 马静, 王明辉. (2021a). 欲戴皇冠必承其重: 地位-权力匹配对员工工作行为的影响. 中国人力资源开发, 38(7), 48-59. |
[30] | * 申晨, 马静, 王明辉. (2021b). 员工地位如何影响其工作态度和行为?权力感知的中介作用和自我监控的调节作用. 心理研究, 14(2), 138-146. |
[31] | * 宋晓雯. (2019). 权力感与心理距离对风险决策的影响研究 [硕士学位论文]. 鲁东大学, 烟台. |
[32] | * 孙麟惠. (2019). 个体权力感水平与自利倾向的关系研究 [硕士学位论文]. 浙江大学, 杭州. |
[33] | * 孙鹏. (2022). 权力感对利他行为的影响:中介效应及调节效应分析 [硕士学位论文]. 山东师范大学, 济南. |
[34] | * 谭洁. (2012). 权力感知匹配的行为接近—抑制效应 [硕士学位论文]. 浙江大学, 杭州. |
[35] | 王弘钰, 于佳利. (2022). 权力感对越轨创新的影响机制研究——基于中国本土文化的解释. 现代财经(天津财经大学学报), 42(4), 3-19. |
[36] | * 王君瑜, 韦欢丹, 迟立忠. (2022). 时间压力与权力感对合作行为的影响——基于囚徒困境博弈合作任务. 第二十四届全国心理学学术会议, 中国河南新乡 |
[37] | * 王磊, 邢志杰. (2019). 权力感知视角下的双元威权领导与员工创新行为. 管理学报, 16(7), 987-996. |
[38] | * 王仁瑾. (2022). 权力感对博弈情境中合作行为的影响及促进研究 [硕士学位论文]. 陕西师范大学, 西安. |
[39] | * 王三银, 王冬冬, 陶颖. (2022). 工作-家庭增益对称性对员工建言的影响. 中国人力资源开发, 39(8), 43-57. |
[40] | * 王雁飞, 陈雪玲, 郑立勋, 朱瑜. (2024). 领导建言寻求对员工主动行为的作用机制研究. 管理学报, 21(6), 840-852. |
[41] | * 王雁飞, 李楠, 郑立勋, 朱瑜. (2024). 游戏化人力资源管理实践对员工创新行为的影响作用机理研究. 中国人力资源开发, 41(7), 6-20. |
[42] | * 王雁飞, 林珊燕, 郑立勋, 朱瑜. (2022). 社会信息加工视角下伦理型领导对员工创新行为的双刃剑影响效应研究. 管理学报, 19(7), 1006-1015. |
[43] | * 王垚, 李小平. (2015). 不同人际关系取向下的权力对利他行为的影响. 心理与行为研究, 13(4), 516-520. |
[44] | 卫旭华, 王傲晨, 江楠. (2018). 团队断层前因及其对团队过程与结果影响的元分析. 南开管理评论, 21(5), 139-149+187. |
[45] | * 卫旭华, 张怡斐. (2023). 权力对组织成员竞争行为的影响:被调节的中介模型. 系统管理学报, 32(1), 141-153. |
[46] | * 谢江佩, 戴馨, 黎常. (2020). 团队成员权力感知对建言行为的影响研究. 科研管理, 41(7), 201-209. |
[47] | * 谢玮. (2020). 审计质量、管理层权力对高管腐败影响的实证研究 [硕士学位论文]. 山东农业大学, 泰安. |
[48] | * 徐悦, 段锦云, 王雨晨. (2018). 权力感与进谏:进谏效能感的中介机制研究. 应用心理学, 24(1), 62-70+61. |
[49] | * 许龙, 孟华兴. (2021). 高绩效工作系统感知促进员工建言行为:链式中介效应分析. 经济与管理, 35(4), 84-92. |
[50] | * 杨红玲, 赵李晶, 刘耀中, 倪亚琨. (2018). 权力感让领导者更自利:自恋人格和信任倾向的调节作用. 中国人力资源开发, 35(12), 68-79. |
[51] |
* 姚琦, 吴章建, 张常清, 符国群. (2020). 权力感对炫耀性亲社会行为的影响. 心理学报, 52(12), 1421-1435.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01421 |
[52] |
尹奎, 迟志康, 董念念, 李培凯, 赵景. (2024). 团队反思与团队资源开发、利用及团队结果的关系:一项元分析. 心理科学进展, 32(2), 228-245.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2024.00228 |
[53] | * 云祥, 李小平. (2012). 权力会导致欺骗吗? 心理研究, 5(6), 40-43. |
[54] | * 詹小慧, 李群, 杨东涛. (2019). LMX差异化对反生产行为的影响——基于跨层次的调节效应. 山西财经大学学报, 41(1), 87-97. |
[55] | * 张超, 陈冰, 赵玉芳. (2022). 社会排斥促进亲群体行为意向:权力感的调节作用. 心理科学, 45(6), 1428-1435. |
[56] | * 张恩涛, 王硕. (2020). 权力和地位对信任行为的影响. 心理科学, 43(2), 460-465. |
[57] | * 张利君. (2019). 会计稳健性、管理层权力与企业过度投资——基于能源类上市公司面板数据的实证研究. 预测, 38(3), 58-63. |
[58] | * 张玲玲. (2021). 顾客导向氛围对员工主动行为的影响研究. 财经问题研究, (9), 121-129. |
[59] | * 章慧南, 胡嘉慧, 曲如杰. (2020). 共享型领导对员工建言行为的影响——员工权力感的中介作用. 技术经济, 39(7), 184-192. |
[60] | * 赵红丹, 陈元华. (2022). 社会责任型人力资源管理如何降低员工亲组织非伦理行为:道德效力和伦理型领导的作用. 管理工程学报, 36(6), 57-67. |
[61] | * 赵占恒. (2018). 管理权力、社会身份与企业高管腐败——基于中国上市公司的实证研究. 郑州轻工业学院学报(社会科学版), 19(4), 73-80. |
[62] | * 周秉, 张苏串. (2024). 组织面子文化对员工亲组织非伦理行为的跨层“双刃”效应研究. 企业经济, 43(7), 60-70. |
[63] | * 周念华, 余明阳, 辛杰. (2021). 感知的企业社会责任对员工创新行为作用机制的实证研究. 研究与发展管理, 33(6), 111-123. |
[64] | * 周天爽, 潘玥杉, 崔丽娟, 杨莹. (2020). 权力感与助人行为:社会距离的中介和责任感的调节. 心理科学, 43(5), 1250-1257. |
[65] | * 周媛媛. (2020). 权力感对不诚实行为的影响:观点采择的中介和受益对象的调节作用 [硕士学位论文]. 四川师范大学, 成都. |
[66] | * 周珍珍. (2017). 员工个人权力感知与员工沉默行为的关系研究 [硕士学位论文]. 华中师范大学, 武汉. |
[67] | * 朱静. (2016). 权力感对建议寻求的影响:自信的中介和谦卑的调节作用 [硕士学位论文]. 苏州大学. |
[68] | * 朱瑜, 谢斌斌. (2018). 差序氛围感知与沉默行为的关系:情感承诺的中介作用与个体传统性的调节作用. 心理学报, 50(5), 539-548. |
[69] | * Ali, H., Mahmood, A., Ahmad, A., & Ikram, A. (2021). Humor of the leader: A source of creativity of employees through psychological empowerment or unethical behavior through perceived power? The role of self-deprecating behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 635300. |
[70] | Amedu, S., & Dulewicz, V. (2018). The relationship between CEO personal power, CEO competencies, and company performance. Journal of General Management, 43(4), 188-198. |
[71] |
Anderson, C., & Berdahl, J. L. (2002). The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1362-1377.
pmid: 12500818 |
[72] | * Anderson, C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, optimism, and risk-taking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(4), 511-536. |
[73] |
Anderson, C., John, O. P., & Keltner, D. (2012). The personal sense of power. Journal of Personality, 80(2), 313-344.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2011.00734.x pmid: 21446947 |
[74] | * Aziz, R. A., Noranee, S., Hassan, N., Hussein, R., & Jacob, G. A. D. (2021). The influence of leader power on interpersonal conflict in the workplace. Journal of International Business, Economics and Entrepreneurship, 6(1), 87-93. |
[75] | Bai, J., Su, J., Xin, Z., & Wang, C. (2024). Calculative trust, relational trust, and organizational performance: A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Business Research, 172, 114435. |
[76] | * Baruch, Y., O'Creevy, M. F., Hind, P., & Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2004). Prosocial behavior and job performance: Does the need for control and the need for achievement make a difference? Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 32(4), 399-411. |
[77] | Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons. |
[78] | Brass, D. J., & Burkhardt, M. E. (1993). Potential power and power use: An investigation of structure and behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 441-470. |
[79] | * Brockner, J., De Cremer, D., van Dijke, M., De Schutter, L., Holtz, B., & Van Hiel, A. (2021). Factors affecting supervisors' enactment of interpersonal fairness: The interactive relationship between their managers' informational fairness and supervisors' sense of power. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(6), 800-813. |
[80] | * Chen, S. C., Zou, W. Q., & Liu, N. T. (2022). Leader humility and machiavellianism: Investigating the effects on followers' self-interested and prosocial behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 742546. |
[81] | * Cheng, Y.-N., Hu, C., Wang, S., & Huang, J.-C. (2024). Political context matters: A joint effect of coercive power and perceived organizational politics on abusive supervision and silence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 41(1), 81-106. |
[82] |
Cho, M., & Keltner, D. (2020). Power, approach, and inhibition: Empirical advances of a theory. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 196-200.
doi: S2352-250X(19)30136-8 pmid: 31563791 |
[83] | Chung, S., Zhan, Y., Noe, R. A., & Jiang, K. (2022). Is it time to update and expand training motivation theory? A meta-analytic review of training motivation research in the 21st century. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(7), 1150-1179. |
[84] | * De Wit, F. R., Scheepers, D., Ellemers, N., Sassenberg, K., & Scholl, A. (2017). Whether power holders construe their power as responsibility or opportunity influences their tendency to take advice from others. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(7), 923-949. |
[85] |
* DeCelles, K. A., DeRue, D. S., Margolis, J. D., & Ceranic, T. L. (2012). Does power corrupt or enable? When and why power facilitates self-interested behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 681-689.
doi: 10.1037/a0026811 pmid: 22250668 |
[86] | * Dissanayake, D. S., & Jayawardana, A. K. (2023). The impact of personal sense of power on unethical decision- making: A moderated mediation model of love of money motive and power distance orientation. Decision, 50(1), 19-34. |
[87] |
* Dubois, D., Rucker, D., & Galinsky, A. (2015). Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(3), 436-449.
doi: 10.1037/pspi0000008 pmid: 25621858 |
[88] |
* Ferguson, A. J., Ormiston, M. E., & Moon, H. (2010). From approach to inhibition: The influence of power on responses to poor performers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(2), 305-320.
doi: 10.1037/a0018376 pmid: 20230071 |
[89] |
Finkelstein, S. (1992). Power in top management teams: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 35(3), 505-538.
pmid: 10120413 |
[90] | * Foulk, T. A., De Pater, I. E., Schaerer, M., du Plessis, C., Lee, R., & Erez, A. (2020). It's lonely at the bottom (too): The effects of experienced powerlessness on social closeness and disengagement. Personnel Psychology, 73(2), 363-394. |
[91] |
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 453-466.
pmid: 14498782 |
[92] | Galinsky, A. D., Rucker, D. D., & Magee, J. C. (2015). Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions. In APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 3. Interpersonal relations. (pp. 421-460). American Psychological Association. |
[93] | * Gilad, C., & Maniaci, M. R. (2022). The push and pull of dominance and power: When dominance hurts, when power helps, and the potential role of other-focus. Personality and Individual Differences, 184, 111159. |
[94] | * Giurge, L. M., Van Dijke, M., Zheng, M. X., & De Cremer, D. (2021). Does power corrupt the mind? The influence of power on moral reasoning and self-interested behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(4), 101288. |
[95] |
* Gu, Z., Liu, L., Tan, X., Liang, Y., Dang, J., Wei, C., ... Wang, G. (2020). Does power corrupt? The moderating effect of status. International Journal of Psychology, 55(4), 499-508.
doi: 10.1002/ijop.12629 pmid: 31696515 |
[96] | * Hershcovis, M. S., Neville, L., Reich, T. C., Christie, A. M., Cortina, L. M., & Shan, J. V. (2017). Witnessing wrongdoing: The effects of observer power on incivility intervention in the workplace. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 142, 45-57. |
[97] | Heller, S., Ullrich, J., & Mast, M. S. (2023). Power at work: Linking objective power to psychological power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 53(1), 5-20. |
[98] | * 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. |
[99] |
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine, 21(11), 1539-1558.
doi: 10.1002/sim.1186 pmid: 12111919 |
[100] | Hofstede, G. (1993). Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Perspectives, 7(1), 81-94. |
[101] | Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1-26. |
[102] | * Hoogervorst, N., De Cremer, D., van Dijke, M., & Mayer, D. M. (2012). When do leaders sacrifice?: The effects of sense of power and belongingness on leader self-sacrifice. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 883-896. |
[103] | * Huang, C., Tian, S., Wang, R., & Wang, X. (2022). High- level talents' perceive overqualification and withdrawal behavior: A power perspective based on survival needs. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 921627. |
[104] | Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta- analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage. |
[105] | * Islam, G., & Zyphur, M. J. (2005). Power, voice, and hierarchy: Exploring the antecedents of speaking up in groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9(2), 93-103. |
[106] | * Issac, A. C., Bednall, T. C., Baral, R., Magliocca, P., & Dhir, A. (2023). The effects of expert power and referent power on knowledge sharing and knowledge hiding. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(2), 383-403. |
[107] | * Jain, A. K., Giga, S. I., & Cooper, C. L. (2011). Social power as a means of increasing personal and organizational effectiveness: The mediating role of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(3), 412-432. |
[108] | * Jia, J., Ma, G., Li, H., Ding, J., & Liu, K. (2022). Social power antecedents of knowledge sharing in project- oriented online communities. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 2493-2505. |
[109] | * Jin, F., Zhu, H., & Tu, P. (2020). How recipient group membership affects the effect of power states on prosocial behaviors. Journal of Business Research, 108, 307-315. |
[110] | * Jin, J., Li, Y., & Liu, S. (2021). Selfish power and unselfish status in chinese work situations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 24(1), 98-110. |
[111] | * Joosten, A., van Dijke, M., Van Hiel, A., & De Cremer, D. (2015). Out of control!? How loss of self-control influences prosocial behavior: The role of power and moral values. Plos One, 10(5), e0126377. |
[112] | Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599-627. |
[113] | * Ju, D., Huang, M., Liu, D., Qin, X., Hu, Q., & Chen, C. (2019). Supervisory consequences of abusive supervision: An investigation of sense of power, managerial self-efficacy, and task-oriented leadership behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 154, 80-95. |
[114] | * Kamans, E., Otten, S., Gordijn, E. H., & Spears, R. (2010). How groups contest depends on group power and the likelihood that power determines victory and defeat. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(6), 715-724. |
[115] |
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110(2), 265-284.
doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.110.2.265 pmid: 12747524 |
[116] | * Khahan, N.-N., Vrabcová, P., Prompong, T., & Nattapong, T. (2024). Moderating effects of resilience on the relationship between self-leadership and innovative work behavior. Sustainable Futures, 7, 100148. |
[117] | * Kim, J., Shin, Y., & Lee, S. (2017). Built on stone or sand: The stable powerful are unethical, the unstable powerful are not. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 437-447. |
[118] | * Kim, K. H., & Guinote, A. (2022). Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(3), 137-144. |
[119] | * Kim, T. H., Lee, S. S., Oh, J., & Lee, S. (2019). Too powerless to speak up: Effects of social rejection on sense of power and employee voice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(10), 655-667. |
[120] | Körner, R., & Schütz, A. (2024). Power balance and relationship quality: An overstated link. Social Psychological and Personality Science, https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506241234391 |
[121] |
* Lammers, J., & Burgmer, P. (2019). Power increases the self-serving bias in the attribution of collective successes and failures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(5), 1087-1095.
doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2556 |
[122] |
* Lammers, J., Stapel, D. A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). Power increases hypocrisy: Moralizing in reasoning, immorality in behavior. Psychological Science, 21(5), 737-744.
doi: 10.1177/0956797610368810 pmid: 20483854 |
[123] |
* Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., & Stapel, D. A. (2009). Differentiating social and personal power: Opposite effects on stereotyping, but parallel effects on behavioral approach tendencies. Psychological Science, 20(12), 1543-1548.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02479.x pmid: 19906122 |
[124] | * Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., & Stapel, D. A. (2010). Power and behavioral approach orientation in existing power relations and the mediating effect of income. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(3), 543-551. |
[125] | * Laslo-Roth, R., & Schmidt-Barad, T. (2020). Personal sense of power, emotion and compliance in the workplace: A moderated mediation approach. International Journal of Conflict Management, 32(1), 39-61. |
[126] | * Lata, M., & Chaudhary, R. (2022). Workplace spirituality and employee incivility: Exploring the role of ethical climate and narcissism. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 102, 103178. |
[127] | * Le, Q.-A., & Lee, C.-Y. (2023). Below-aspiration performance and risk-taking behaviour in the context of taiwanese electronic firms: A contingency analysis. Asia Pacific Business Review, 29(3), 654-677. |
[128] | * Li, H., Chen, Y.-R., & Hildreth, J. A. D. (2022). Powerlessness also corrupts: Lower power increases self-promotional lying. Organization Science, 34(4), 1442-1440. |
[129] | Liang, S., & Chang, Y. (2016). Social exclusion and choice: The moderating effect of power state. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 15(5), 449-458. |
[130] | * Lin, X., Chen, Z. X., Tse, H. H. M., Wei, W., & Ma, C. (2019). Why and when employees like to speak up more under humble leaders? The roles of personal sense of power and power distance. Journal of Business Ethics, 158(4), 937-950. |
[131] | * Liu, X., Wen, J., Zhang, L., & Chen, Y. (2021). Does organizational collectivist culture breed self-sacrificial leadership? Testing a moderated mediation model. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 94, 102862. |
[132] | * Liu, Y., Chen, S., Bell, C., & Tan, J. (2020). How do power and status differ in predicting unethical decisions? A cross-national comparison of China and Canada. Journal of Business Ethics, 167, 745-760. |
[133] | * Liu, Y., Wang, W., Lu, H., & Yuan, P. (2022). The divergent effects of employees’ sense of power on constructive and defensive voice behavior: A cross-level moderated mediation model. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 39(4), 1341-1366. |
[134] | * Loi, R., Lin, X., & Tan, A. J. (2019). Powered to craft? The roles of flexibility and perceived organizational support. Journal of Business Research, 104, 61-68. |
[135] | * Lu, J. G., Brockner, J., Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2017). The dark side of experiencing job autonomy: Unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 222-234. |
[136] | * Luo, S., Wang, J., Xie, Z., & Tong, D. (2023). When and why are employees willing to engage in voice behavior: A power cognition perspective. Current Psychology, 43(5), 4211-4222. |
[137] | * Magni, F., Gong, Y., Li, J., Pan, J., & Zhou, M. (2022). The paradoxical relationship between sense of power and creativity: Countervailing pathways and a boundary condition. Personnel Psychology, 77(2), 441-474. |
[138] | * Mayer, D. M., Thau, S., Workman, K. M., Van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, D. (2012). Leader mistreatment, employee hostility, and deviant behaviors: Integrating self- uncertainty and thwarted needs perspectives on deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 24-40. |
[139] | * Metin Camgoz, S., Bayhan Karapinar, P., Tayfur Ekmekci, O., Metin Orta, I., & Ozbilgin, M. F. (2023). Why do some followers remain silent in response to abusive supervision? A system justification perspective. European Management Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2023.07.001 |
[140] | Min, D., & Kim, J. H. (2013). Is power powerful? Power, confidence, and goal pursuit. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30(3), 265-275. |
[141] | * Mooijman, M., Kouchaki, M., Beall, E., & Graham, J. (2020). Power decreases the moral condemnation of disgust-inducing transgressions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 161, 79-92. |
[142] |
* Mooijman, M., van Dijk, W. W., van Dijk, E., & Ellemers, N. (2019). Leader power, power stability, and interpersonal trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 152, 1-10.
doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.03.009 |
[143] | * Morrison, E. W., See, K. E., & Pan, C. (2015). An approach-inhibition model of employee silence: The joint effects of personal sense of power and target openness. Personnel Psychology, 68(3), 547-580. |
[144] | Nikitin, J., & Freund, A. M. (2010). When wanting and fearing go together: The effect of co-occurring social approach and avoidance motivation on behavior, affect, and cognition. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(5), 783-804. |
[145] |
* Overall, N., Maner, J., Hammond, M., Cross, E., Chang, V., Low, R., ... Sasaki, E. (2022). Actor and partner power are distinct and have differential effects on social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 124(2), 311-343.
doi: 10.1037/pspi0000398 pmid: 35617223 |
[146] | * Pai, J., Whitson, J., Kim, J., & Lee, S. (2021). A relational account of low power: The role of the attachment system in reduced proactivity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 167, 28-41. |
[147] | * Park, I.-J., Doan, T., Zhu, D., & Kim, P. B. (2021). How do empowered employees engage in voice behaviors? A moderated mediation model based on work-related flow and supervisors’ emotional expression spin. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 95, 102878. |
[148] |
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(2), 438-454.
doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.438 pmid: 17371090 |
[149] | Puleo, B. K. (2020). Laboratory-derived, coded communicative behaviors among individuals with cancer and their caregiving partners [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Arizona State University. |
[150] | * Qiuyun, G., Liu, W., Zhou, K., & Mao, J. (2020). Leader humility and employee organizational deviance: The role of sense of power and organizational identification. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(3), 463-479. |
[151] | * Randolph, W. A., & Kemery, E. R. (2011). Managerial use of power bases in a model of managerial empowerment practices and employee psychological empowerment. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(1), 95-106. |
[152] | * Rios, K., Fast, N. J., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2015). Feeling high but playing low:Power, need to belong, and submissive behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(8), 1135-1146. |
[153] | * Rong, Y., Yang, B., & Ma, L. (2017). Leaders' sense of power and team performance: A moderated mediation model. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 45(4), 641-656. |
[154] | * Rus, D., Van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2010). Leader power and leader self-serving behavior: The role of effective leadership beliefs and performance information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(6), 922-933. |
[155] | * Rus, D., van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2012). Leader power and self-serving behavior: The moderating role of accountability. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 13-26. |
[156] | * Sahadev, S. (2005). Exploring the role of expert power in channel management: An empirical study. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(5), 487-494. |
[157] | * Sanders, S., Wisse, B. M., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2015). Holding others in contempt: The moderating role of power in the relationship between leaders’ contempt and their behavior vis-à-vis employees. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(2), 213-241. |
[158] | Schaerer, M., Swaab, R. I., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Anchors weigh more than power: Why absolute powerlessness liberates negotiators to achieve better outcomes. Psychological Science, 25, 1581-1591. |
[159] |
* Schaerer, M., Tost, L. P., Huang, L., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. (2018). Advice giving: A subtle pathway to power. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(5), 746-761.
doi: 10.1177/0146167217746341 pmid: 29359627 |
[160] | Schmidt, F. L., Oh, I. S., & Hayes, T. L. (2009). Fixed-versus random-effects models in meta-analysis: Model properties and an empirical comparison of differences in results. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 62(1), 97-128. |
[161] | * Sekścińska, K., Rudzinska-Wojciechowska, J., & Kusev, P. (2022). How decision-makers’ sense and state of power induce propensity to take financial risks. Journal of Economic Psychology, 89, 102474. |
[162] | * Seppälä, T., Lipponen, J., Bardi, A., & Pirttilä-Backman, A. M. (2012). Change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviour: An interactive product of openness to change values, work unit identification, and sense of power. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(1), 136-155. |
[163] | * Sijbom, R. B., & Parker, S. K. (2020). When are leaders receptive to voiced creative ideas? Joint effects of leaders’ achievement goals and personal sense of power. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 497790. |
[164] | * Slabu, L., & Guinote, A. (2010). Getting what you want: Power increases the accessibility of active goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 344-349. |
[165] |
* Smith, P. K., & Bargh, J. A. (2008). Nonconscious effects of power on basic approach and avoidance tendencies. Social Cognition, 26(1), 1-24.
doi: 10.1521/soco.2008.26.1.1 pmid: 18568085 |
[166] | Smith, P. K., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). The nonconscious nature of power: Cues and consequences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(10), 918-938. |
[167] | * Smith, P. K., Jost, J. T., & Vijay, R. (2008). Legitimacy crisis? Behavioral approach and inhibition when power differences are left unexplained. Social Justice Research, 21, 358-376. |
[168] |
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 |
[169] | * Sun, P., Li, H., Liu, Z., Ren, M., Guo, Q., & Kou, Y. (2021). When and why does sense of power hinder self-reported helping behavior? Testing a moderated mediation model in chinese undergraduates. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 51(5), 502-512. |
[170] | Taras, V., Steel, P., & Kirkman, B. L. (2012). Improving national cultural indices using a longitudinal meta- analysis of Hofstede's dimensions. Journal of World Business, 47(3), 329-341. |
[171] | Ten Brinke, L., & Keltner, D. (2022). Theories of power: Perceived strategies for gaining and maintaining power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(1), 53-72. |
[172] | Tonidandel, S., & LeBreton, J. M. (2015). Rwa web: A free, comprehensive, web-based, and user-friendly tool for relative weight analyses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30(2), 207-216. |
[173] | * Tost, L. P., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. P. (2012). Power, competitiveness, and advice taking: Why the powerful don’t listen. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 53-65. |
[174] | * Tost, L. P., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. P. (2013). When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1465-1486. |
[175] | * Tost, L. P., & Johnson, H. H. (2019). The prosocial side of power: How structural power over subordinates can promote social responsibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 152, 25-46. |
[176] |
* Van Dijke, M., De Cremer, D., Langendijk, G., & Anderson, C. (2018). Ranking low, feeling high: How hierarchical position and experienced power promote prosocial behavior in response to procedural justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(2), 164-219.
doi: 10.1037/apl0000260 pmid: 28933910 |
[177] |
Van Kleef, G. A., & Lange, J. (2020). How hierarchy shapes our emotional lives: Effects of power and status on emotional experience, expression, and responsiveness. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33, 148-153.
doi: S2352-250X(19)30080-6 pmid: 31470224 |
[178] | * Villa, S., & Castañeda, J. A. (2020). A behavioural investigation of power and gender heterogeneity in operations management under uncertainty. Management Research Review, 43(6), 753-771. |
[179] | Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta-analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 865-885. |
[180] | * Vriend, T., Jordan, J., & Janssen, O. (2016). Reaching the top and avoiding the bottom: How ranking motivates unethical intentions and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 137, 142-155. |
[181] | Wagers, S. M. (2015). Deconstructing the “power and control motive”: Moving beyond a unidimensional view of power in domestic violence theory. Partner Abuse, 6(2), 230-242. |
[182] | Wagers, S. M., Wareham, J., & Sellers, C. S. (2021). Testing the validity of an internal power theory of interpersonal violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(15-16), 7223-7248. |
[183] | * Wang, P., Zou, L., Huang, M., Amdu, M. K., & Guo, T. (2024). Work-related identity discrepancy and employee proactive behavior: The effects of face-pressure and benevolent leadership. Acta Psychologica, 248, 104354. |
[184] | * Wang, Y. (2020). When power increases perspective-taking: The moderating role of syncretic self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 166, 110207. |
[185] | * Webster, B. D., Greenbaum, R. L., Mawritz, M. B., & Reid, R. J. (2022). Powerful, high-performing employees and psychological entitlement: The detrimental effects on citizenship behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 136, 103725. |
[186] | Wei, X. (2024). Smart meta-analysis (SMA) user manual (pp. 1-8). Lanzhou: Lanzhou University. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16133.56803 |
[187] | Wiltermuth, S. S., & Flynn, F. J. (2013). Power, moral clarity, and punishment in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 1002-1023. |
[188] | * Wisse, B., & Rus, D. (2012). Leader self-concept and self-interested behavior. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11(1), 40-48. |
[189] | * Yoon, D. J., & Farmer, S. M. (2018). Power that builds others and power that breaks: Effects of power and humility on altruism and incivility in female employees. The Journal of Psychology, 152(1), 1-24. |
[190] | Yu, A., Hays, N. A., & Zhao, E. Y. (2019). Development of a bipartite measure of social hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 152, 84-104. |
[191] | * Yu, A., Xu, W., & Pichler, S. (2022). A social hierarchy perspective on the relationship between leader-member exchange (LMX) and interpersonal citizenship. Journal of Management & Organization, https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2022.87 |
[192] | * Yu, F., Wu, Y., & Liu, J. (2018). Narcissistic leadership and feedback avoidance behavior: The role of sense of power and proactive personality. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Business and Information Management. |
[193] | * Yuan, P., Ju, F., Cheng, Y., & Liu, Y. (2021). Influence of sense of power on epidemic control policy compliance. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 49(9), 1-12. |
[194] | Yukl, G., & Falbe, C. M. (1991). Importance of different power sources in downward and lateral relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(3), 416-423. |
[195] | * Zhang, Z., Gong, M., Jia, M., & Zhu, Q. (2024). Why and when does CFO ranking in top management team informal hierarchy affect entrepreneurial firm initial public offering fraud? Journal of Management Studies, 61(7), 2775-3400. |
[196] | * Zhong, Y., & Li, H. (2024). Do lower-power individuals really compete less? An investigation of covert competition. Organization Science, 35(2), 741-768. |
[197] |
* Zhou, H., & He, H. (2020). Exploring role of personal sense of power in facilitation of employee creativity: A dual mediation model based on the derivative view of self-determination theory. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 13, 517-527.
doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S257201 pmid: 32607021 |
[1] | GAO Baixue, XIE Yunlong, LUO Junlong, HE Wen. Application of machine learning to improve the predictive performance of non-suicidal self-injury: A systematic review [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2025, 33(3): 506-519. |
[2] | ZHAO Ziqing, YU Jinting, CHEN Jiayan, WANG Yunru, HUANG Jia, Raymond C.K. CHAN. Changes in symptoms and functional outcomes in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: A systematic review and three-level meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2025, 33(1): 42-61. |
[3] | MAO Jiang-hua, CHEN Wen-wen, JIN Can. How virtual communication affects supervisor-subordinate power configuration? A perspective from self-construction and mutual construction of identity [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(9): 1430-1449. |
[4] | SU Tao, ZENG Haowen, ZHONG Xiaolin, MA Wencong, CHEN Xiude. Woe-fortune interdependence: A meta-analysis of the two-sided effect of narcissistic leadership on subordinates’ work efficiency [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(9): 1463-1487. |
[5] | TANG Tian, WANG Yu, GONG Fangying, SHI Ke, LI Xi, LIU Wei, CHEN Ning. The relationship between parenting styles and positive development of Chinese adolescents : A series of meta-analytic studies [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(8): 1302-1314. |
[6] | WU Jiahui, FU Hailun. A meta-analysis of the relationship between achievement goal orientation and academic achievement: The mediating role of self-efficacy and student engagement [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(7): 1104-1125. |
[7] | WEN Siyan, YU Xuchen, JIN Lei, GONG Junru, ZHANG Xiaohan, SUN Jinglin, ZHANG Shan, LYU Houchao. A three-level meta-analysis of the relationship between family dysfunction and mental health of children and adolescents [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(5): 771-789. |
[8] | YUAN Yue, WU Zhiming, XIE Qiushi. The effect of time pressure on individual work outcomes: A meta-analytic review [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(3): 465-485. |
[9] | YIN Kui, CHI Zhikang, DONG Niannian, LI Peikai, ZHAO Jing. The relationship between team reflexivity and team resources development, team resources utilization, and team outcomes: A meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(2): 228-245. |
[10] | MENG Xianxin, CHEN Yijing, WANG Xinyi, YUAN Jiajin, YU Delin. The relationship between school connectedness and depression: A three-level meta-analytic review [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(2): 246-263. |
[11] | HAN Zhiwei, CHENG Yanyuan, REN Zhishuai, WANG Danyang, LI Guojing. A meta-analysis of work connectivity behavior after-hours and work-life conflict: Based on the work-home resources model [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(12): 2031-2049. |
[12] | ZHU Yanhan, HE Bin, SUN Lei. The effects of state power on prosocial behavior: A three-level meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(11): 1786-1799. |
[13] | JIANG Jianwu, LONG Hanhuan, HU Jieyu. A meta-analysis of the impact of AI application on employees in the workplace [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(10): 1621-1639. |
[14] | LIU Hongyan, ZHOU Yonghan, CHEN Yanxia. Exploring the effectiveness of marketing intervention strategies for suboptimal food: A meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2024, 32(10): 1640-1658. |
[15] | KANG Dan, WEN Min, ZHANG Yingjie. The relationship between fine motor skills and mathematical ability in children: A meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2023, 31(8): 1443-1459. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||