Advances in Psychological Science ›› 2019, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (3): 447-452.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2019.00447
• Research Reports • Previous Articles Next Articles
LI Xiao-Ming1,2(), JIANG Song-Yuan
Received:
2017-12-18
Online:
2019-03-15
Published:
2019-01-22
Contact:
LI Xiao-Ming
E-mail:lixiaoming-2007@sohu.com
CLC Number:
LI Xiao-Ming, JIANG Song-Yuan. The influence of power on choice deferral[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(3): 447-452.
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%) |
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 | -- |
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. |
[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. |
[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.
doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.129.1.139 URL pmid: 12555797 |
[5] |
Dhar R. ( 1996). The effect of decision strategy on the decision to defer choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9( 4), 265-281.
doi: 10.1002/(sici)1099-0771(199612)9:4<265::aid-bdm231>3.0.co;2-4 URL |
[6] |
Dhar R., & Nowlis S.M . ( 1999). The effect of time pressure on consumer choice deferral. Journal of Consumer Research, 25( 4), 369-384.
doi: 10.1086/209545 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.11.009 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.453 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1037/a0012633 URL pmid: 19025295 |
[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.
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.008 URL |
[11] |
Joshi P.D., & Fast N.J . ( 2013). Power and reduced temporal discounting. Psychological Science, 24( 4), 432-438.
doi: 10.1177/0956797612457950 URL pmid: 23404083 |
[12] |
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 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.008 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.001 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.5465/19416520802211628 URL |
[17] |
Magee J.C., & Smith P.K . ( 2013). The social distance theory of power. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17( 2), 158-186.
doi: 10.1177/1088868312472732 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1177/0146167212453341 URL pmid: 22854791 |
[19] |
Miyamoto Y., & Ji L.J . ( 2011). Power fosters context- independent, analytic cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37( 11), 1449-1458.
doi: 10.1177/0146167211411485 URL pmid: 21653580 |
[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.
doi: 10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 URL pmid: 18697684 |
[21] |
Rassin E., Muris P., Booster E., & Kolsloot I . ( 2008). Indecisiveness and informational tunnel vision. Personality and Individual Differences, 45( 1), 96-102.
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.03.006 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2011.06.001 URL |
[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.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02207.x URL pmid: 19121134 |
[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.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.578 URL pmid: 16649856 |
[25] |
Tversky A.& Shafir E. ,( 1992). Choice under conflict: The dynamics of deferred decision. Psychological Science, 3( 6), 358-361.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00047.x URL |
[1] | WANG Xudong, HE Yaji, FAN Huiyong, LUO Yangmei, CHEN Xuhai. The advantages and disadvantages of interpersonal anger: Evidence from meta-analysis [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2023, 31(3): 386-401. |
[2] | KOU Dongxiao, WANG Xiaoyu. The influence of power on interpersonal sensitivity [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2023, 31(1): 108-115. |
[3] | ZHAI Hongkun, LI Qiang, WEI Xiaowei. Power analysis in structural equation modeling: Principles and methods [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(9): 2117-2130. |
[4] | WEN Zhonglin, XIE Jinyan, FANG Jie, WANG Yifan. Methodological research on hypothesis test and related issues in China’s mainland from 2001 to 2020 [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(8): 1667-1681. |
[5] | LUAN Mo, WU Shuang. How does decision making process signal social status? A maximizing decision making perspective [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(10): 2194-2205. |
[6] | ZHANG Jianping, LIN Shuqian, LIU Shanshi, ZHANG Ya, LI Huanrong. Empowering leadership and leadership effectiveness: A meta-analytic examination [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2021, 29(9): 1576-1598. |
[7] | YIN Kui, ZHAO Jing, LI Can, WANG Honglei, WANG Chongfeng. The formation mechanisms of leader empowering behavior [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2021, 29(6): 1097-1110. |
[8] | YIN Kui, ZHANG Kaili, ZHAO Jing, GONG Zhenxing. The effects of employee empowerment expectation: The underlying theoretical explanations [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2021, 29(2): 353-364. |
[9] | HUANG Long, XU Fu-ming, HU Xiao-yu. Scanmatch: A new method for studying decision-making process [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(9): 1454-1461. |
[10] | LI Xin, LIU Pei, XIAO Chenjie, WANG Xiaotian, LI Aimei. How does power in organizations promote prosocial behavior? The mediating role of sense of responsibility [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(9): 1586-1598. |
[11] | ZHONG Chupeng, QU Zhe, DING Yulong. The influences of prestimulus alpha oscillation on visual perception [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(6): 945-958. |
[12] | XIANG Shuting, ZHAO Kai, NING Nan. The double-edged sword effect of leadership empowerment behavior [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2020, 28(11): 1814-1835. |
[13] | LI Pengbo, SUN Yuqing, LEI Ming. The forming mechanism of leader empowering behavior based on goal theory [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(7): 1167-1182. |
[14] | 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. |
[15] | WANG Haixia, JIA Huiyuan, SUN Hailong, LI Aimei. Constant connectivity attenuates autonomy: Mechanism and consequences [J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2019, 27(11): 1802-1811. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||