Science of Emotion and Sensibility (감성과학)

Korean Society for Emotion and Sensibility (한국감성과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Influence of Power and Status on Social Exclusion

제3자의 권력과 지위에 따른 사회적 배제행위에 대한 판단

  • 조준형 (광운대학교 산업심리학과) ;
  • 이형철 (광운대학교 산업심리학과) ;
  • 김신우 (광운대학교 산업심리학과)
  • Received : 2022.01.10
  • Accepted : 2022.02.14
  • Published : 2022.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Power and status are core elements that distinguish social classes and strongly influence social interaction. Although they are the foundation of social influence, they have different origins (Fragale et al., 2011). While power usually is based on personal ability or legal, institutional legitimacy, status is rooted in voluntary support from other people. Hence, whereas people with power often demonstrate egoistic behavior, those with high status show relationship-based altruism (Hasty & Maner, 2020). People recognize the difference between the two and have stereotypical beliefs or expectations about the people's behavior with high power or status (Magee, 2009). The current research tested how the judgment on social exclusion, the unique social influence of power and status, changes depending on the actor's power and status. We constructed social exclusion scenarios in which we manipulated actors' power and status and asked participants to rate an actor's pain and behavioral fairness. Participants' ratings showed that the actor's fairness and pain would differ depending on the actor's power and status (Expt. 1), which is consistent with the stereotypes above. In particular, the significant effects of the actor's anonymity in the cases of low power and high status (Expts. 2A, 2B) provide further evidence for the proposal that status but not power originates from voluntary support from others.

권력과 지위는 사회계층을 구분하는 핵심 요소들로 사회적 상호작용에 강한 영향을 미친다. 이 둘은 사회적 영향력의 기반이 된다는 공통점을 가지지만, 서로 다른 원천에 의해 발생한다는 차이점을 보인다(Fragale et al., 2011). 권력은 주로 능력이나 법적, 제도적 정당성에 근거하지만 지위는 타인의 자발적인 지지에 근거한다. 따라서 권력자는 자기중심적으로 행위하지만, 지위를 가진 사람은 관계중심적으로 행동하는 경향이 있다(Hasty & Maner, 2020). 사람들 또한 이러한 차이를 인식하여 권력과 지위에 따른 사람들의 행동에 대해 고정관념 혹은 기대를 가진다(Magee, 2009). 본 연구는 권력 혹은 지위의 중요한 사회적 영향인 사회적 배제 행위에 대한 판단이 행위자의 권력과 지위에 따라 어떻게 달라지는지를 검증했다. 이를 위해 행위자의 권력, 지위, 익명성을 조작한 사회적 배제 시나리오를 구성하여 참가자들에게 행위자의 고통과 행위 공정성을 평정하도록 요청했다. 그 결과 참가자들은 권력과 지위에 따라 행위자의 공정성과 고통이 달라질 것이라고 응답했으며(실험 1), 이는 앞서 언급한 고정관념과 일치하는 패턴을 보였다. 특히 권력이 낮을 때와 지위가 높을 때 익명성에 따른 효과가 유의미하게 달라졌으며(실험 2A, 2B) 이는 권력보다는 지위가 타인의 자발적인 지지에 근거한다는 주장에 대한 경험적인 증거를 제공한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2020년도 광운대학교 교내학술연구비 지원에 의해 연구되었음.

References

  1. Ames, D. R., Bianchi, E. C., & Magee, J. C. (2010). Professed impressions: What people say about others affects onlookers' perceptions of speakers' power and warmth. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 152-158. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.011
  2. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
  3. Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Social exclusion impairs self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 589-604. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.589
  4. Blader, S. L., & Chen, Y. R. (2012). Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 994-1014. DOI: 10.1037/a0026651
  5. Blader, S. L., Shirako, A., & Chen, Y. R. (2016). Looking out from the top: Differential effects of status and power on perspective taking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42(6), 723-737. DOI: 10.1177/0146167216636628
  6. Case, C. R., Bae, K. K., & Maner, J. K. (2018). To lead or to be liked: When prestige-oriented leaders prioritize popularity over performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115(4), 657-676. DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000138
  7. Chen, Z., Poon, K. T., Bernstein, M. J., & Teng, F. (2014). Rejecting another pains the self: The impact of perceived future rejection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50(1), 225-233. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.007
  8. Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Super size me: Product size as a signal of status. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6), 1047-1062. DOI: 10.1086/661890
  9. Duclos, R., Wan, E. W., & Jiang, Y. (2013). Show me the honey! Effects of social exclusion on financial risk-taking. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 122-135. DOI: 10.1086/668900
  10. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
  11. Foulsham, T., Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Henrich, J., & Kingstone, A. (2010). Gaze allocation in a dynamic situation: Effects of social status and speaking. Cognition, 117(3), 319-331. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.003
  12. Fragale, A. R., Overbeck, J. R., & Neale, M. A. (2011). Resources versus respect: Social judgments based on targets' power and status positions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 767-775. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.006
  13. Fragale, A. R., Rosen, B., Xu, C., & Merideth, I. (2009). The higher they are, the harder they fall: The effects of wrongdoer status on observer punishment recommendations and intentionality attributions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 53-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.05.002
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1068-1074. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01824.x
  17. Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392-404. DOI: 10.1037/a0017346
  18. Gruenfeld, D. H., Inesi, M. E., Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(1), 111-127. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.111
  19. Hall, J. A., Coats, E. J., & LeBeau, L. S. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 898-924. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.898
  20. Hasty, C., & Maner, J. K. (2020). Power, status, and social judgment. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33(1), 1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.007
  21. 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
  22. Kim, S., Jo, J., & Li, H-C. O. (2021). Psychological Essentialism and Category Representation (심리적 본질주의와 범주표상). Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 32(2), 55-73. DOI: 10.19066/cogsci.2021.32.2.001
  23. Lee, G. (2018). Key The Key to Leisure is Human Relationships: Social Exclusion, Active Leisure, and Passive Leisure (여가는 사이에 있다: 사회적 배제, 적극적 여가, 그리고 소극적 여가). Korean Journal of Leisure, Recreation, & Park, 42(3), 1-11. DOI:10.26446/kjlrp.2018.9.42.3.1
  24. Lee, G., Li, H-C. O., & Kim, S. (2020). Effect of Interaction between the Base-rate and Category Coherence on Property Generalization (범주 응집성과 기저율의 상호작용이 속성 일반화에 미치는 효과). Korean Journal Cognitive & Biological Psychology, 32(1), 1-19. DOI: 10.22172/cogbio.2020.32.1.001
  25. Lee, J., & Shrum, L. J. (2012). Conspicuous consumption versus charitable behavior in response to social exclusion: A differential needs explanation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 530-544. DOI: 10.1086/664039
  26. Magee, J. C. (2009). Seeing power in action: The roles of deliberation, implementation, and action in inferences of power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(1), 1-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.010
  27. Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). 8 social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 351-398. DOI: 10.5465/19416520802211628
  28. Magee, J. C., Galinsky, A. D., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2007). Power, propensity to negotiate, and moving first in competitive interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(2), 200-212. DOI: 10.1177/0146167206294413
  29. Maner, J. K. (2017). Dominance and prestige: A tale of two hierarchies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 526-531. DOI: 10.1177/0963721417714323
  30. Molden, D. C., Lucas, G. M., Gardner, W. L., Dean, K., & Knowles, M. L. (2009). Motivations for prevention or promotion following social exclusion: Being rejected versus being ignored. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 415-431. DOI: 10.1037/a0012958
  31. Nezlek, J. B., Wesselmann, E. D., Wheeler, L., & Williams, K. D. (2012). Ostracism in everyday life. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 16(2), 91-104. DOI: 10.1037/a0028029
  32. Nezlek, J. B., Wesselmann, E. D., Wheeler, L., & Williams, K. D. (2015). Ostracism in everyday life: The effects of ostracism on those who ostracize. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155(5), 432-451. DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2015.1062351
  33. Poon, K. T., & Chen, Z. (2015). How does the source of rejection perceive innocent victims?. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155(5), 515-526. DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2015.1061972
  34. Sjastad, H., Zhang, M., Masvie, A. E., & Baumeister, R. (2021). Social exclusion reduces happiness by creating expectations of future rejection. Self and Identity, 20(1), 116-125. DOI: 10.1080/15298868.2020.1779119
  35. 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(3), 358-376. DOI: 10.1007/s11211-008-0077-9
  36. Smith, P. K., & Magee, J. C. (2015). The interpersonal nature of power and status. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3(1), 152-156. DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.04.007
  37. Tai, K., Zheng, X., & Narayanan, J. (2011). Touching a teddy bear mitigates negative effects of social exclusion to increase prosocial behavior. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(6), 618-626. DOI: 10.1177/1948550611404707
  38. Twenge, J. M., Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Bartels, J. M. (2007). Social exclusion decreases prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 56-66. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.56
  39. Twenge, J. M., Catanese, K. R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Social exclusion causes self-defeating behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(3), 606-615. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.3.606
  40. Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., Finkenauer, C., Gundemir, S., & Stamkou, E. (2011). Breaking the rules to rise to power: How norm violators gain power in the eyes of others. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2(5), 500-507. DOI: 10.1177/1948550611398416
  41. Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63(3), 182-196. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.3.182
  42. Weick, M., & Guinote, A. (2008). When subjective experiences matter: Power increases reliance on the ease of retrieval. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(6), 956-970. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.6.956
  43. Yarkin, K. L., Harvey, J. H., & Bloxom, B. M. (1981). Cognitive sets, attribution, and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(2), 243-252. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.41.2.243