When Dispositional and Role Power Fit: Implications for Self-Expression and Self-Other Congruence

Serena Chen, University of California - Berkeley
Carrie A. Langner, University of California - Berkeley
Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, University of California - Berkeley

Article comments

Copyright © 2009 American Psychological Association. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. The definitive version is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014526

NOTE: At the time of publication, the author Carrie A. Langner was not yet affiliated with Cal Poly.

Abstract

Integrating and extending the literatures on social power and person–environment fit, 4 studies tested the hypothesis that when people's dispositional beliefs about their capacity to influence others fit their assigned role power, they are more likely to engage in self-expression—that is, behave in line with their states and traits—thereby increasing their likelihood of being perceived by others in a manner congruent with their own self-judgments (i.e., self–other congruence). In Studies 1–3, dispositionally high- and low-power participants were randomly assigned to play a high- or low-power role in an interaction with a confederate. When participants' dispositional and role power fit (vs. conflicted), they reported greater self-expression (Study 1). Furthermore, under dispositional-role power fit conditions, the confederate's ratings of participants' emotional experiences (Study 2) and personality traits (Study 3) were more congruent with participants' self-reported emotions and traits. Study 4's results replicated Study 3's results using an implicit manipulation of power and outside observers' (rather than a confederate's) ratings of participants. Implications for research on power and person perception are discussed.