Abraham Lincoln had said,If you want to test a mans character,give him power.
Its a truism that power magnifies personality – – but a new study has revealed that its not true.
Before,people thought that disposition is linked to will; its mainly internally driven, said University College London psychologist Ana Guinote,who conducted the study with Mario Weick of the University of Kent and London doctoral student Alice Cai.
Our findings show that the environment crucially triggers dispositional or counter-dispositional behaviour in powerful people, Guinote stated.
Research shows that dispositions – – the tendency to act and think in particular ways – – can be superseded by other responses,including those the person rarely does or thinks.
But do the powerful,who are usually in control,stick to their dispositional guns?
In three experiments,participants were given power rolesas a manager or employee,a consequential or trivial adviser on university policy – – then put to tasks testing whether their habitual natures ruled.
In the first,participants were tested to tease out traits they consider important and those that are far from their consciousness.
Participants with strong tendencies to see others as rude,honest,or sociable then played a word game. For half of them the game contained neutral words like paper and board; for the rest,the games words brought out counter-dispositions- – characteristics they didnt normally consider.
Those words were also relevant to the subsequent task: judging people through descriptive sentences. For instance,When Donald met his friend he told him he was quite smelly. Was he honest or rude? The neutrally primed power-holders judged others more strongly in their typical ways. But when descriptions outside their usual thinking were brought to mind,the power-holders used those instead. The lower-powered peoples perceptions remained constant.
In another experiment,participants wrote down charities they liked. A week later they chose which theyd donate to,either on a blank screen or from a list. On a blank screen,power increased the likelihood of picking favored charities. When given the list,though,the powerful chose other organizations; those lacking power werent swayed.
The third experiment involved people with selfish or cooperative dispositions distributing valuable tokens to themselves and others. In the neutral condition,the selfish power-holders hoarded the tokens; the sociable ones shared. When primed to act differently,this was no longer the case.
Power-holders have to make quick decisions and respond to opportunities,so they often deploy automatic cognitive processes, explained Guinote.
Power-holders more strongly express their characters,but they are also susceptible to manipulations of environmental cues – – much more than less-powerful people,who act deliberatively and have less extreme but more consistent preferences.
The implications? Organizational culture and social norms have an incredible power to influence power-holders. But no Orwellian manipulation is needed. Its enough to have a culture around them or tasks to do that call for desirable behaviours.
Culture can bring out collaboration or authoritarianism,sociability or greed in the people who wield influence and power.