This work explores how a person's view of herself may determine
her use of power in a complex dispute resolution negotiation.
Three studies of asymmetric power in negotiations demonstrate
that the impact of power upon motivation and behavior is
moderated by both a person's self-view, as well as the social
context. In Study One, results reveal that in a one-on-one
dispute, powerful individuals primed to hold an interdependent
(as opposed to independent) self-construal are more generous in
resolving their disputes with low-powered opponents. Study Two
replicates this finding but reveals a different pattern in
inter-group disputes, where powerful interdependent teams of
negotiators are actually less generous than independent teams.
Study Three provides a conceptual replication of Study Two,
utilizing chronic measures of self-construal and self-reported
measures of behavior. Results suggest that an interdependent
self-construal may lead to a more benevolent use of power in
dyadic conflicts but more exploitive uses of power in intergroup
conflicts. Implications for the understanding of power and
self-construal are discussed.
