Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SPSP Annual Meeting 2010

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Litman-Adizes, T.
Right arrow Articles by Fontaine, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Litman-Adizes, T.
Right arrow Articles by Fontaine, G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Consequences of Social Power and Causal Attribution for Compliance as Seen by Powerholder and Target

Tchia Litman-Adizes

University of California Los Angeles

Bertram H. Raven

University of California Los Angeles

Gary Fontaine

University of Missouri Kansas City

72 subjects read six scenarios in which a supervisor used different bases of power to successfully influence a worker to alter his method of work. Half the subjects were asked to take the perspective of the supervisor in answering the questions and half that of the worker. Information power was perceived as most effective in inducing private acceptance of change. Information, reward, and referent power were most conducive to mutual evaluation and liking. Coercive and legitimate power were least effective in both respects. Subjects were more likely to attribute compliance to the worker's will if referent, information, or reward power was used, less so if coercion or legitimate power was used. Supervisors, as compared to workers, were particularly likely to assume responsibility for inducing change, feel confident that change would continue, and evaluate the other favorably. Theoretical implications for social power and attributional mediation are discussed.

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 4, No. 2, 260-264 (1978)
DOI: 10.1177/014616727800400218


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
J. I. Shaw and L. Condelli
Effects of Compliance Outcome and Basis of Power on the Powerholder-Target Relationship
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, June 1, 1986; 12(2): 236 - 246.
[Abstract]


Home page
Economic and Industrial DemocracyHome page
C. S. Granrose and A. Hochner
Are Women Interested in Saving Their Jobs Through Employee-Ownership?
Economic and Industrial Democracy, August 1, 1985; 6(3): 299 - 324.
[Abstract]