The Asymmetric Nature of Social Hierarchies: Unpacking the Dynamic Relationship Between Power and Status

References

• Abele AE, Brack S (2013) Preference for other persons’ traits is dependent on the kind of social relationship. Soc. Psychol. 44(2):84. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Bruckmüller S (2011) The bigger one of the “Big Two”? Preferential processing of communal information. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 47(5):935–948.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Wojciszke B (2007) Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 93(5):751–763.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Wojciszke B (2014) Communal and agentic content in social cognition: A dual perspective model. Olson JM, Zanna MP, eds. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 50 (Academic Press, New York), 195–255.Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Uchronski M, Suitner C, Wojciszke B (2008) Towards an operationalization of the fundamental dimensions of agency and communion: Trait content ratings in five countries considering valence and frequency of word occurrence. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 38(7):1202–1217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abele AE, Ellemers N, Fiske ST, Koch A, Yzerbyt V (2021) Navigating the social world: Toward an integrated framework for evaluating self, individuals, and groups. Psych. Rev. 128(2):290–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aguinis H, Bradley KJ (2014) Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Organ. Res. Methods 17(4):351–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Brown CE (2010) The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Brief AP, Staw BM, eds. Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews, vol. 30 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 55–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Galinsky AD (2006) Power, optimism, and risk‐taking. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 36(4):511–536.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Kilduff GJ (2009) Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 96(2):491–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Hildreth JAD, Howland L (2015) Is the desire for status a fundamental human motive? A review of the empirical literature. Psych. Bull. 141(3):574–601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Kraus MW, Galinsky AD, Keltner D (2012) The local-ladder effect: Social status and subjective well-being. Psych. Sci. 23(7):764–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anicich EM, Fast NJ, Halevy N, Galinsky AD (2016) When the bases of social hierarchy collide: Power without status drives interpersonal conflict. Organ. Sci. 27(1):123–140.Link, Google Scholar
• Anicich EM, Schaerer M, Gale J, Foulk TA (2021) A fluctuating sense of power is associated with reduced well-being. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 92:104057.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Badura KL, Grijalva E, Newman DA, Yan TT, Jeon G (2018) Gender and leadership emergence: A meta‐analysis and explanatory model. Personality Psych. 71(3):335–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bailey ER, Carter JT, Iyengar SS, Galinsky AD (2026) The privilege to be yourself depends on what others think of you: Social status increases authenticity. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 52(7):1849–1865.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belmi P, Pfeffer J (2018) The effect of economic consequences on social judgment and choice: Reward interdependence and the preference for sociability versus competence. J. Organ. Behav. 39(8):990–1007.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bendersky C, Pai J (2018) Status dynamics. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 5:183–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blader SL, Chen Y-R (2012) Differentiating the effects of status and power: A justice perspective. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 102(5):994–1014.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blader SL, Chen Y-R (2014) What’s in a name? Status, power, and other forms of social hierarchy. Cheng J, Tracy J, Anderson C, eds. The Psychology of Social Status (Springer, New York), 71–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blader SL, Shirako A, Chen Y-R (2016) Looking out from the top: Differential effects of status and power on perspective taking. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 42(6):723–737.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bliese PD (1998) Group size, ICC values, and group-level correlations: A simulation. Organ. Res. Methods 1(4):355–373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Castro-Schilo L, Grimm KJ (2018) Using residualized change versus difference scores for longitudinal research. J. Soc. Personal Relationships 35(1):32–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatman JA, Flynn FJ (2005) Full-cycle micro-organizational behavior research. Organ. Sci. 16(4):434–447.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen GL, Bliese PD (2002) The role of different levels of leadership in predicting self- and collective efficacy: Evidence for discontinuity. J. Appl. Psych. 87(3):549–556.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen S, Lee-Chai AY, Bargh JA (2001) Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 80(2):173–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cheng JT, Tracy JL, Foulsham T, Kingstone A, Henrich J (2013) Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 104(1):103–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chiao JY (2010) Neural basis of social status hierarchy across species. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 20(6):803–809.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi JS, Hong SB, Na JKY, Kim BK (2025) Asymmetric effects of holding power versus status: Implications for motivation and group dynamics. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 51(1):81–95.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chou EY (2018) Naysaying and negativity promote initial power establishment and leadership endorsement. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 115(4):638–656.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ, Furby L (1970) How we should measure “change”: Or should we? Psych. Bull. 74(1):68–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronin MA, Weingart LR, Todorova G (2011) Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet? Acad. Management Ann. 5(1):571–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cuddy AJ, Fiske ST, Glick P (2008) Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the bias map. Adv. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 40:61–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Cremer D, Tyler TR (2005) A matter of intragroup status: The importance of respect for the viability of groups. Thomas-Hunt MC, ed. Status and Groups (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK), 1–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DeCelles KA, DeRue DS, Margolis JD, Ceranic TL (2012) Does power corrupt or enable? When and why power facilitates self-interested behavior. J. Appl. Psych. 97(3):681–689.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Derfler-Rozin R, Isaakyan S, Park H (2022) Swiftly judging whom to bring on board: How person perception (accurate or not) influences selection of prospective team members. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 173:104206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dishop CR, Braun MT, Kuljanin G, DeShon RP (2020) Thinking longitudinal: A framework for scientific inferences with temporal data. Griep Y, Hansen SD, ed. Handbook on the Temporal Dynamics of Organizational Behavior (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK), 404–425.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dong Y, Liao H, Chuang A, Zhou J, Campbell EM (2015) Fostering employee service creativity: Joint effects of customer empowering behaviors and supervisory empowering leadership. J. Appl. Psych. 100(5):1364–1380.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doyle SP, Lount RB (2023) Rising above vs. falling below: When and why status change affects interpersonal helping in workgroups. Organ. Sci. 34(3):1157–1183.Link, Google Scholar
• Driskell JE, Olmstead B, Salas E (1993) Task cues, dominance cues, and influence in task groups. J. Appl. Psych. 78(1):51–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Du Plessis C, Nguyen MHB, Foulk TA, Schaerer M (2023) Relative power and interpersonal trust. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 124(3):567–592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (1995) Alternatives to difference scores as dependent variables in the study of congruence in organizational research. Organ. Behav Human Decision Processes 64(3):307–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (2002) Alternatives to difference scores: Polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. Drasgow F, Schmitt NW, eds. Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 350–400.Google Scholar
• Fast NJ, Halevy N, Galinsky AD (2012) The destructive nature of power without status. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 48(1):391–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiske ST, Dupree CH, Nicolas G, Swencionis JK (2016) Status, power, and intergroup relations: The personal is the societal. Current Opinion Psych. 11:44–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ (2003) How much should I give and how often? The effects of generosity and frequency of favor exchange on social status and productivity. Acad. Management J. 46(5):539–553.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flynn FJ, Reagans RE, Amanatullah ET, Ames DR (2006) Helping one’s way to the top: Self-monitors achieve status by helping others and knowing who helps whom. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 91(6):1123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foucault M (1979) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Sheridan A, translator (Vintage Books, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Fragale AR (2006) The power of powerless speech: The effects of speech style and task interdependence on status conferral. Organ. Behav Human Decision Processes 101(2):243–261.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fragale AR, Overbeck JR, Neale MA (2011) Resources versus respect: Social judgments based on targets’ power and status positions. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 47(4):767–775.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Gruenfeld DH, Magee JC (2003) From power to action. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 85(3):453–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Magee JC, Gruenfeld DH, Whitson JA, Liljenquist KA (2008) Power reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 95(6):1450–1466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gray SM, Bunderson JS, van der Vegt GS, Rink F, Gedik Y (2023) Leveraging knowledge diversity in hierarchically differentiated teams: The critical role of hierarchy stability. Acad. Management J. 66(2):462–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grimm KJ, Castro-Schilo L, Davoudzadeh P (2013) Modeling intraindividual change in nonlinear growth models with latent change scores. GeroPsych J. Gerontopsychology Geriatric Psychiatry 26(3):153–162.Google Scholar
• Grimm KJ, Ram N, Estabrook R (2017) Growth Modeling: Structural Equation and Multilevel Modeling Approaches (Guilford Publications, New York).Google Scholar
• Grimm KJ, Ram N, Hamagami F (2011) Nonlinear growth curves in developmental research. Child Dev. 82(5):1357–1371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grimm KJ, An Y, McArdle JJ, Zonderman AB, Resnick SM (2012) Recent changes leading to subsequent changes: Extensions of multivariate latent difference score models. Structural Equation Model. Multidisciplinary J. 19(2):268–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grosz MP, van Aert RCM, Back MD (2024) A meta-analytic review of the associations of personality, intelligence, and physical size with social status. Psych. Bull. 150(3):253–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gruenfeld DH, Tiedens LZ (2010) Organizational preferences and their consequences. Fiske ST, Gilbert DT, Lindzey G, eds. Handbook of Social Psychology, 5th ed., vol. 2 (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York), 1252–1287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guinote A (2017) How power affects people: Activating, wanting, and goal seeking. Annual Rev. Psych. 68:353–381.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hadar B, Simchon A, Gilead M, Smith PK (2026) Elevated power promotes prosocial behavior more than elevated status. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 52(7):1796–1811.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hardy CL, Van Vugt M (2006) Nice guys finish first: The competitive altruism hypothesis. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 32(10):1402–1413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2015) An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behav. Res. 50(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hays NA, Bendersky C (2015) Not all inequality is created equal: Effects of status versus power hierarchies on competition for upward mobility. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 108(6):867–882.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hays NA, Lee AJ, Blader SL, Galinsky AD (2026) The social relations-approach theory of social hierarchy: Understanding the distinct psychological experiences of status and power. Psych. Rev. 133(4):957–993.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henrich J, Gil-White FJ (2001) The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution Human Behav. 22(3):165–196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ho AK, Sidanius J, Kteily N, Sheehy-Skeffington J, Pratto F, Henkel KE, Foels R, Stewart AL (2015) The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO7 scale. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 109(6):1003–1028.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Howell TM, Harrison DA, Burris ER, Detert JR (2015) Who gets credit for input? Demographic and structural status cues in voice recognition. J. Appl. Psych. 100(6):1765–1784.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu J, Judge TA (2017) Leader-team complementarity: Exploring the interactive effects of leader personality traits and team power distance values on team processes and performance. J. Appl. Psych. 102(6):935–955.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Humphrey SE, Hollenbeck JR, Meyer CJ, Ilgen DR (2007) Trait configurations in self-managed teams: A conceptual examination of the use of seeding for maximizing and minimizing trait variance in teams. J. Appl. Psych. 92(3):885–892.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ilgen DR, Hollenbeck JR, Johnson M, Jundt D (2005) Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Rev. Psych. 56:517–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inesi ME, Botti S, Dubois D, Rucker DD, Galinsky AD (2011) Power and choice: Their dynamic interplay in quenching the thirst for personal control. Psych. Sci. 22(8):1042–1048.Crossref, Google Scholar
• James LR (1982) Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. J. Appl. Psych. 67(2):219–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Judd CM, James-Hawkins L, Yzerbyt V, Kashima Y (2005) Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 89(6):899–913.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Judge TA, Colbert AE, Ilies R (2004) A meta-analysis of the relationship between intelligence and leadership. J. Appl. Psych. 89(3):542–552.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kan OY, Xu E, Huang X, Liu W, Tang YP (2018) Reaching the limits of reciprocity in favor exchange: The effects of generous, stingy, and matched favor giving on social status. J. Appl. Psych. 103(6):614–630.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keltner D, Gruenfeld DH, Anderson C (2003) Power, approach, and inhibition. Psych. Rev. 110(2):265–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, la Voie L (1985) Separating individual and group effects. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 48(2):339–348. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kifer Y, Heller D, Perunovic WQE, Galinsky AD (2013) The good life of the powerful: The experience of power and authenticity enhances subjective well-being. Psych. Sci. 24(3):280–288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koch A, Yzerbyt V, Abele A, Ellemers N, Fiske ST (2021) Social evaluation: Comparing models across interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup, several-group, and many-group contexts. Gawronski B, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 63 (Elsevier, Cambridge, MA), 1–68.Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Bell BS (2003) Work groups and teams in organizations. Weiner IB, ed. Handbook of Psychology: Industrial and Organizational Psychology (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ), 333–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Chao GT (2012) The dynamics of emergence: Cognition and cohesion in work teams. Managerial Decision Econom. 33(5–6):335–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Chao GT, Grand JA, Braun MT, Kuljanin G (2013) Advancing multilevel research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organ. Res. Methods 16(4):581–615.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamertz K, Aquino K (2004) Social power, social status and perceptual similarity of workplace victimization: A social network analysis of stratification. Human Relations 57(7):795–822.Crossref, Google Scholar
• LeBreton JM, Senter JL (2008) Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organ. Res. Methods 11(4):815–852.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lovaglia MJ, Lucas JW, Thye SR (1998) Status processes and mental ability test scores. Amer. J. Sociol. 104(1):195–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Magee JC, Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self‐reinforcing nature of power and status. Acad. Management Ann. 2(1):351–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahadevan N, Gregg AP, Sedikides C (2019) Is self-regard a sociometer or a hierometer? Self-esteem tracks status and inclusion, narcissism tracks status. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 116(3):444–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad. Management Rev. 26(3):356–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marr JC, Thau S (2014) Falling from great (and not-so-great) heights: How initial status position influences performance after status loss. Acad. Management J. 57(1):223–248.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matusik JG, Hollenbeck JR, Mitchell RL (2021) Latent change score models for the study of development and dynamics in organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 24(4):772–801.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Management Rev. 20(3):709–734.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mishra S (2025) What is mine cannot be yours: How zero-sum perceptions of power and status shape men’s perceptions of ingroup harm from women’s hierarchical advancement. J. Personality Soc. Psych., ePub ahead of print April 17, https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000496.Google Scholar
• Mishra S, Kray LJ (2022) The mitigating effect of desiring status on social backlash against ambitious women. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 102:104355.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell TR, James LR (2001) Building better theory: Time and the specification of when things happen. Acad. Management Rev. 26(4):530–547.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadler A, Chernyak-Hai L (2014) Helping them stay where they are: Status effects on dependency/autonomy-oriented helping. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 106(1):58–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Marr JC (2020) A trajectories based perspective on status dynamics. Current Opin. Psych. 33:233–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Yong K, Spataro SE (2010) Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 46(2):396–401.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Doyle SP, Lount RB, To C (2016) Cheating to get ahead or to avoid falling behind? The effect of potential negative versus positive status change on unethical behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 137:172–183.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pettit NC, Sivanathan N, Gladstone E, Marr JC (2013) Rising stars and sinking ships: Consequences of status momentum. Psych. Sci. 24(8):1579–1584.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ponce de Leon R, Bailey ER (2025) The preeminence of communality in the leadership preferences of followers. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 129(2):226–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Propp KM (1995) An experimental examination of biological sex as a status cue in decision-making groups and its influence on information use. Small Group Res. 26(4):451–474.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL (1978) Conformity, group-oriented motivation, and status attainment in small groups. Soc. Psych. 41(3):175–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rucker DD, Dubois D, Galinsky AD (2011) Generous paupers and stingy princes: Power drives consumer spending on self versus others. J. Consumer Res. 37(6):1015–1029.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rucker DD, Galinsky AD, Magee JC (2018) The agentic–communal model of advantage and disadvantage: How inequality produces similarities in the psychology of power, social class, gender, and race. Olson JM, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 58 (Elsevier, Cambridge, MA), 71–125.Google Scholar
• Rus D, van Knippenberg D, Wisse B (2012) Leader power and self-serving behavior: The moderating role of accountability. Leadership Quart. 23(1):13–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russell AMT, Fiske ST (2008) It’s all relative: Competition and status drive interpersonal perception. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 38(7):1193–1201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sabey TB, Rodell JB, Matta FK (2021) To and fro: The costs and benefits of power fluctuation throughout the day. J. Appl. Psych. 106(9):1357–1373.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sapolsky RM (2005) The influence of social hierarchy on primate health. Science 308(5722):648–652.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scholl A, Rapp H, van Kleef GA, Sassenberg K (2025) On the road to power: Showing benevolence and integrity fuels power granting. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 31(4):243–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scholl A, de Wit F, Ellemers N, Fetterman AK, Sassenberg K, Scheepers D (2018) The burden of power: Construing power as responsibility (rather than as opportunity) alters threat-challenge responses. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 44(7):1024–1038.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shim SH, Livingston RW, Phillips KW, Lam SSK (2021) The impact of leader eye gaze on disparity in member influence: Implications for process and performance in diverse groups. Acad. Management J. 64(6):1873–1900.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simone M, Lockhart G (2019) Empirical sample size guidelines for use of latent difference score mediation. Structural Equation Model. Multidisciplinary J. 26(4):636–645.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith PK, Magee JC (2015) The interpersonal nature of power and status. Current Opin. Behav. Sci. 3:152–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith PK, Jostmann NB, Galinsky AD, Van Dijk WW (2008) Lacking power impairs executive functions. Psych. Sci. 19(5):441–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stephens NM, Markus HR, Phillips LT (2014) Social class culture cycles: How three gateway contexts shape selves and fuel inequality. Annual Rev. Psych. 65:611–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sturm RE, Antonakis J (2015) Interpersonal power: A review, critique, and research agenda. J. Management 41(1):136–163.Google Scholar
• Swencionis JK, Fiske ST (2016) Promote up, ingratiate down: Status comparisons drive warmth-competence tradeoffs in impression management. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 64:27–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas JS, Loignon AC, Woehr DJ, Loughry ML, Ohland MW (2020) Dyadic viability in project teams: The impact of liking, competence, and task interdependence. J. Bus. Psych. 35(5):573–591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thye SR (2000) A status value theory of power in exchange relations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 65(3):407–432.Crossref, Google Scholar
• To C, Leslie LM, Torelli CJ, Stoner JL (2020) Culture and social hierarchy: Collectivism as a driver of the relationship between power and status. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 157:159–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tost LP (2015) When, why, and how do powerholders “feel the power”? Examining the links between structural and psychological power and reviving the connection between power and responsibility. Res. Organ. Behav. 35:29–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tost LP, Johnson HH (2019) The prosocial side of power: How structural power over subordinates can promote social responsibility. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 152:25–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tyler T (2001) A Psychological Perspective on the Legitimacy of Institutions and Authorities (Cambridge University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Tyler TR (2006) Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Rev. Psych. 57:375–400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tyler TR, Blader SL (2000) Cooperation in Groups: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Behavioral Engagement (Routledge, Philadelphia).Google Scholar
• Van Kleef GA, Cheng JT (2020) Power, status, and hierarchy: Current trends and future challenges. Current Opin. Psych. 33:v–xiv.Google Scholar
• Van Kleef GA, Homan AC, Finkenauer C, Gündemir S, Stamkou E (2011) Breaking the rules to rise to power: How norm violators gain power in the eyes of others. Soc. Psych. Personality Sci. 2(5):500–507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Knippenberg B, van Knippenberg D, de Cremer D (2007) Why people resort to coercion: The role of utility and legitimacy. Eur. J. Soc. Psych. 37(2):276–287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkataramani V, Green SG, Schleicher DJ (2010) Well-connected leaders: The impact of leaders’ social network ties on LMX and members’ work attitudes. J. Appl. Psych. 95(6):1071–1084.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang XJ, Guinote A, Krumhuber EG (2018) Dominance biases in the perception and memory for the faces of powerholders, with consequences for social inferences. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 78:23–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang M, Zhou L, Zhang Z (2016) Dynamic modeling. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 3:241–266.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watts J, Sheehan O, Atkinson QD, Bulbulia J, Gray RD (2016) Ritual human sacrifice promoted and sustained the evolution of stratified societies. Nature 532(7598):228–231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Willer R (2009) Groups reward individual sacrifice: The status solution to the collective action problem. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 74(1):23–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wittenbaum GM (1998) Information sampling in decision-making groups: The impact of members’ task-relevant status. Small Group Res. 29(1):57–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wojciszke B, Struzynska-Kujalowicz A (2007) Power influences self-esteem. Soc. Cognition 25(4):472–494.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu S, Smallman R, Smith PK (2024) Self-control signals and affords power. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 127(6):1189–1214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wu J, Tangirala S, Zhang PC (2025) When voice takes destructive rather than constructive forms in manager-employee dyads: A power-dependence perspective. J. Appl. Psych. 110(10):1331–1349.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu R, DeShon RP, Dishop CR (2020) Challenges and opportunities in the estimation of dynamic models. Organ. Res. Methods 23(4):595–619.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu SY, Greer LL (2023) The role of resources in the success or failure of diverse teams: Resource scarcity activates negative performance-detracting resource dynamics in social category diverse teams. Organ. Sci. 34(1):24–50.Link, Google Scholar
• Yu A, Hays NA, Zhao EY (2019) Development of a bipartite measure of social hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 152:84–104.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhong R, Yu L, Zhu J, Zhu L (2025) Combat poison with “poison”: Leader-targeted negative team gossip mitigates the detrimental team consequences of abusive supervision climate. J. Appl. Psych. 110(9):1174–1197.Crossref, Google Scholar