Copyright (c) 2010 All rights reserved. http://works.bepress.com/clangner Recent documents in Carrie A. Langner en-us Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:15:26 PDT 3600 http://works.bepress.com/clangner/4 http://works.bepress.com/clangner/4 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:01:53 PDT A content analysis system for measuring positive concessions (offering concessions) and negative concessions (rejecting offered concessions) was introduced and validated through an archival study of government-to-government documents from 4 crises, 2 of which escalated to war and 2 of which were peacefully resolved. In the archival documents, concession making was positively associated with affiliation motivation and negatively associated with power motivation. A 2nd, laboratory experimental study confirmed these relationships and demonstrated priming effects of motive imagery and concession making, in a received diplomatic letter, on participants' responses. Finally, the motive imagery and concessions scores in participants' responses were related in predicted ways to their policy choices. Carrie A. Langner Articles http://works.bepress.com/clangner/3 http://works.bepress.com/clangner/3 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:01:52 PDT A dyadic methodological and statistical approach to social power is used to test the notion that an individual’s power and a partner’s power have distinct effects on the individual’s emotional experience. Two studies examined actor and partner effects of social power on emotion within dyadic interactions. Across interpersonal contexts and measures of social power, the individual’s own social power, theorized to activate behavioral approach, was associated with positive emotion (an actor effect). In contrast, being subject to a partner’s elevated social power, theorized to activate behavioral inhibition, was associated with increased negative emotion (a partner effect). The discussion focuses on how dyadic methodological and statistical approaches point to new lines of inquiry in the study of social power. Carrie A. Langner Articles http://works.bepress.com/clangner/2 http://works.bepress.com/clangner/2 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:01:51 PDT 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. Serena Chen Articles http://works.bepress.com/clangner/1 http://works.bepress.com/clangner/1 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 10:01:50 PDT In two studies, we investigate the effects of individuals’ power motivation on decision-making. We distinguish between two types of power motivation [McClelland, D. C. (1970). The two faces of power. Journal of International Affairs, 24, 29–47; Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: The Free Press] and demonstrate that both types of power motivation facilitate influential decision-making but that each type plays a different role in different contexts. In a conflict context (Study 1), individuals’ personalized (self-serving) power motivation was associated with antisocial decisions, and in a healthcare context (Study 2), individuals socialized (other-serving) power motivation was associated with prosocial decisions. Furthermore, the type of power motivation elicited in each context was associated with less perceived need to deliberate over the relevant policy decision. In separating out the independent effects of each type of power motivation, we are able to explain more variance in decision-making behavior across various contexts than in models using aggregate power motivation (personalized plus socialized). Joe C. Magee Articles