When Dispositional and Role Power Fit

Implications for Self-Expression and Self-Other Congruence

Chen, Serena
Langner, Carrie A.
Mendoza-Denton, Rodolfo

¹Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley

Carrie A. Langner is now at the Department of Psychology, California Polytechnic State University.

Portions of this research were presented at the 7th Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Palm Springs, CA, January 2006. We thank Matthew Feinberg for his contributions to Study 4 and Cameron Anderson, Nathanael Fast, and members of the Self, Identity, & Relationships (SIR) Lab at University of California, Berkeley for their comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Serena Chen, Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, 3419 Tolman Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720-1650. E-mail: [email protected]

Received September 7, 2006

Revision received October 13, 2008

Accepted October 15, 2008

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(3):p 710-727, March 2009. | DOI: 10.1037/a0014526

Integrating and extending the literatures on social power and person-environment fit, 4 studies tested the hypothesis that when people's dispositional beliefs about their capacity to influence others fit their assigned role power, they are more likely to engage in self-expression—that is, behave in line with their states and traits—thereby increasing their likelihood of being perceived by others in a manner congruent with their own self-judgments (i.e., self-other congruence). In Studies 1-3, dispositionally high- and low-power participants were randomly assigned to play a high- or low-power role in an interaction with a confederate. When participants' dispositional and role power fit (vs. conflicted), they reported greater self-expression (Study 1). Furthermore, under dispositional-role power fit conditions, the confederate's ratings of participants' emotional experiences (Study 2) and personality traits (Study 3) were more congruent with participants' self-reported emotions and traits. Study 4's results replicated Study 3's results using an implicit manipulation of power and outside observers' (rather than a confederate's) ratings of participants. Implications for research on power and person perception are discussed.