Relative power and interpersonal trust.

Because trust is essential in the development and maintenance of well-functioning relationships, scholars across numerous scientific disciplines have sought to determine what causes people to trust others. Power dynamics are known to predict trust, but research on the relationship between power and trust is inconclusive, with mixed results and without systematic consideration of how the relative power distribution within dyadic relationships may influence trust in those relationships. Building on interdependence theory, we propose that both individuals in an unequal-power dyad trust each other less than individuals in an equal-power dyad because unequal-power dyads heighten the perception of a conflict of interest. We demonstrate the effect of relative power on interpersonal trust across eight main studies and 16 supplemental studies (including 12 preregistered studies; total N = 10,531), and we test the mechanism with measurement-of-mediation and moderation-of-process approaches. We confirm that the effect of power on interpersonal trust occurs only with relative power (an interpersonal manifestation of power), not with felt power (an intrapersonal manifestation). Finally, we show that the effect of relative power on interpersonal trust via conflict of interest is attenuated in the presence of intergroup competition, a theoretically motivated moderator with practical implications. Overall, the present research clarifies the relationship between relative power and interpersonal trust, suggests that high- and low-power individuals may share similar psychological experiences within the context of unequal-power relationships, and highlights the importance of considering the context in which power dynamics occur. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

With great power comes more job demands: The dynamic effects of experienced power on perceived job demands and their discordant effects on employee outcomes.

In this work, we consider the complex and discordant effects that psychological power has on powerholders. To do so, we integrate the situated focus theory of power, which identifies perceptions of job demands as a key outcome of power, with new insights from the challenge-hindrance framework, which acknowledges that job demands may both help and hurt employees. Our model delineates how power-induced job demands may simultaneously benefit (manifested as goal progress and meaningfulness) and harm (manifested as physical discomfort and anxiety) powerholders. By identifying job demands as a key mediator we provide an integrative account of the nuanced effects that power has on powerholders. Additionally, we show that the relationship between feeling powerful and perceiving one's job to be demanding is stronger for employees higher (vs. lower) in neuroticism. We tested our theoretical model in two studies-a field experiment where we tested the full model, and a second experiment where we conceptually replicated the effect of power on perceived job demands. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Trapped by a first hypothesis: How rudeness leads to anchoring.

In this article we explore the effect of encounters with rudeness on the tendency to engage in anchoring, one of the most robust and widespread cognitive biases. Integrating the self-immersion framework with the selective accessibility model (SAM), we propose that rudeness-induced negative arousal will narrow individuals' perspectives in a way that will make anchoring more likely. Additionally, we posit that perspective taking and information elaboration will attenuate the effect of rudeness on both negative arousal and subsequent anchoring. Across four experimental studies, we test the impact of exposure to rudeness on anchoring as manifested in a variety of tasks (medical diagnosis, judgment tasks, and negotiation). In a pilot study, we find that rudeness is associated with anchoring among a group of medical students making a medical diagnosis. In Study 1, we show that negative arousal mediates the effect of rudeness on anchoring among medical residents treating a patient, and that perspective taking moderates these effects. Study 2 replicates the results of Study 1 using a common anchoring task, and Study 3 builds on these results by replicating them in a negotiation setting and testing information elaboration as a boundary condition. Across the four studies, we find consistent evidence that rudeness-induced negative arousal leads to anchoring, and that these effects can be mitigated by perspective taking and information elaboration. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Getting back to the "new normal": Autonomy restoration during a global pandemic.

We investigate the psychological recovery process of full-time employees during the 2-week period at the onset of the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Past research suggests that recovery processes start after stressors abate and can take months or years to unfold. In contrast, we build on autonomy restoration theory to suggest that recovery of impaired autonomy starts immediately even as a stressor is ongoing. Using growth curve modeling, we examined the temporal trajectories of two manifestations of impaired autonomy-powerlessness and (lack of) authenticity-to test whether recovery began as the pandemic unfolded. We tested our predictions using a unique experience-sampling dataset collected over a 2-week period beginning on the Monday after COVID-19 was declared a "global pandemic" by the World Health Organization and a "national emergency" by the U.S. Government (March 16-27, 2020). Results suggest that autonomy restoration was activated even as the pandemic worsened. Employees reported decreasing powerlessness and increasing authenticity during this period, despite their subjective stress-levels not improving. Further, the trajectories of recovery for both powerlessness and authenticity were steeper for employees higher (vs. lower) in neuroticism, a personality characteristic central to stress reactions. Importantly, these patterns do not emerge in a second experience-sampling study collected prior to the COVID-19 crisis (September 9-20, 2019), highlighting how the pandemic initially threatened employee autonomy, but also how employees began to recover their sense of autonomy almost immediately. The present research provides novel insights into employee well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and suggests that psychological recovery can begin during a stressful experience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The virtuous cycle of daily motivation: Effects of daily strivings on work behaviors, need satisfaction, and next-day strivings.

We extend the theory of purposeful work behavior (TPWB, Barrick, Mount, & Li, 2013) by conceptualizing three key motivational strivings (communion striving, accomplishment striving, and status striving) as dynamic constructs that have implications for how employees act and feel each day at work. Building on TPWB, we propose that morning communion striving, accomplishment striving, and status striving will motivate unique behaviors at work that day-specifically helping, task-performance, and enacted power, respectively. Considering the implications of these striving-induced behaviors on basic psychological needs, we expect that helping, task-performance, and enacted power will, in turn, enhance employees' daily need satisfaction in ways that enhance corresponding next-morning strivings, thus generating a virtuous motivational cycle. Furthermore, we hypothesize that the relationship between daily striving-induced work behaviors and daily need satisfaction will be stronger for employees who are higher (vs. lower) in power. We find support for a virtuous cycle of daily motivation, whereby striving-induced behaviors and enhanced need satisfaction mediate the relationship between previous-morning and next-morning strivings. As expected, we found that employees high (vs. low) in power were more sensitive to the outcomes of their status striving. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Energizing leaders via self-reflection: A within-person field experiment.

The leader role is demanding and depleting, explaining why many leaders struggle to remain engaged while doing their job. In this study, we present theory and an intervention focused on improving leader energy. Integrating cognitive energetics theory (Kruglanski et al., 2012) with leader identity theory and expressive writing research, we develop and test a positive leader self-reflection intervention, which asks leaders to reflect on aspects of their selves that make them good leaders. We expected that this intervention would improve leaders' access to and application of their energy in ways that would make them more influential at work. We tested these theoretical expectations in an experimental experience sampling study where, as expected, we found that leaders experienced less depletion and through it heightened work engagement on intervention versus control days. Work engagement, in turn, improved perceived prosocial impact and clout, two markers of leaders' influence at work. We conceptually replicated the depletion-reducing effect of the intervention in a second study and showed that its effectiveness was specific to those who held leadership roles within their organizations. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the intervention and of our findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Rudeness and Medical Team Performance.

OBJECTIVES: Rudeness is routinely experienced by medical teams. We sought to explore the impact of rudeness on medical teams' performance and test interventions that might mitigate its negative consequences. METHODS: Thirty-nine NICU teams participated in a training workshop including simulations of acute care of term and preterm newborns. In each workshop, 2 teams were randomly assigned to either an exposure to rudeness (in which the comments of the patient's mother included rude statements completely unrelated to the teams' performance) or control (neutral comments) condition, and 2 additional teams were assigned to rudeness with either a preventative (cognitive bias modification [CBM]) or therapeutic (narrative) intervention. Simulation sessions were evaluated by 2 independent judges, blind to team exposure, who used structured questionnaires to assess team performance. RESULTS: Rudeness had adverse consequences not only on diagnostic and intervention parameters (mean therapeutic score 3.81 ± 0.36 vs 4.31 ± 0.35 in controls, P < .01), but also on team processes (such as information and workload sharing, helping and communication) central to patient care (mean teamwork score 4.04 ± 0.34 vs 4.43 ± 0.37, P < .05). CBM mitigated most of these adverse effects of rudeness, but the postexposure narrative intervention had no significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: Rudeness has robust, deleterious effects on the performance of medical teams. Moreover, exposure to rudeness debilitated the very collaborative mechanisms recognized as essential for patient care and safety. Interventions focusing on teaching medical professionals to implicitly avoid cognitive distraction such as CBM may offer a means to mitigate the adverse consequences of behaviors that, unfortunately, cannot be prevented.

Impressed by impression management: Newcomer reactions to ingratiated supervisors.

Organizational newcomers are unfamiliar with many aspects of their workplace and look for information to help them reduce uncertainty and better understand their new environment. One aspect critical to newcomers is the disposition of their supervisor-the person who arguably can impact the newcomer's career the most. To form an impression of their new supervisor, newcomers look to social cues from coworkers who have interpersonal contact with the supervisor. In the present research, we investigate the ways newcomers use observed ingratiation-a common impression management strategy whereby coworkers try to appear likable (Schlenker, 1980)-to form impressions of a supervisor's warmth. Research on social influence cannot easily account for how third parties will interpret ingratiation, as the behaviors linked to ingratiation suggest something positive about the target, yet the unsavory aspects of the behavior imply it may not have the same effects as other positive behaviors. Our findings suggest that newcomers are unique in that they are motivated to learn about their new supervisor, and are prone to ignore those unsavory aspects and infer something positive about a supervisor targeted with ingratiation. Our findings also suggest that this effect can be weakened based on the supervisor's response. In other words, newcomers rely less on evidence from a coworker's ingratiation in the presence of direct behaviors from the supervisor. (PsycINFO Database Record

The Impact of Rudeness on Medical Team Performance: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Iatrogenesis often results from performance deficiencies among medical team members. Team-targeted rudeness may underlie such performance deficiencies, with individuals exposed to rude behavior being less helpful and cooperative. Our objective was to explore the impact of rudeness on the performance of medical teams. METHODS: Twenty-four NICU teams participated in a training simulation involving a preterm infant whose condition acutely deteriorated due to necrotizing enterocolitis. Participants were informed that a foreign expert on team reflexivity in medicine would observe them. Teams were randomly assigned to either exposure to rudeness (in which the expert's comments included mildly rude statements completely unrelated to the teams' performance) or control (neutral comments). The videotaped simulation sessions were evaluated by 3 independent judges (blinded to team exposure) who used structured questionnaires to assess team performance, information-sharing, and help-seeking. RESULTS: The composite diagnostic and procedural performance scores were lower for members of teams exposed to rudeness than to members of the control teams (2.6 vs 3.2 [P = .005] and 2.8 vs 3.3 [P = .008], respectively). Rudeness alone explained nearly 12% of the variance in diagnostic and procedural performance. A model specifying information-sharing and help-seeking as mediators linking rudeness to team performance explained an even greater portion of the variance in diagnostic and procedural performance (R(2) = 52.3 and 42.7, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Rudeness had adverse consequences on the diagnostic and procedural performance of the NICU team members. Information-sharing mediated the adverse effect of rudeness on diagnostic performance, and help-seeking mediated the effect of rudeness on procedural performance.