Understanding the Psychology of Advantage and Disadvantage AN AGENTIC-COMMUNAL MODEL OF HIERARCHY AND INEQUALITY Adam D. Galinsky, Columbia University Derek D. Rucker, Northwestern University Joe C. Magee, New York University
Understanding the Psychology of
Advantage and Disadvantage
AN AGENTIC-COMMUNAL MODEL OF
HIERARCHY AND INEQUALITY
Adam D. Galinsky, Columbia University
Derek D. Rucker, Northwestern University
Joe C. Magee, New York University
Elements of Inequality
1. Resources: Income, wealth
2. Deference: Submissive behavior, influence on judgments
3. Evaluations: Competence, credit for favorable outcomes
4. Opportunities: Interviews, promotion, corporate boards
PREMISE 1:
Disparities in resources, deference,
evaluations, and opportunities create
social hierarchy and inequality
Systems
• Social Class
• Gender
• Race
• Power
Elements
• Resources
• Deference
• Evaluations
• Opportunities
Agentic-Communal Model of Inequality
Inequality
Systems of Inequality
Social Class
DEFERENCE
Blue-collar individuals express more deference to an interviewer Lenski & Leggett (1960) AJS
RESOURCES
Higher social class individuals have higher incomes and greater wealth
OPPORTUNITIES
Applicants from upper-class backgrounds get more interviews and offers
from prestigious employers Lin et al. (1981) ASR; Rivera (2012) ASR
EVALUATION
Upper-class children are evaluated more positively for identical performanceDarley & Gross (1983) JPSP
Systems of Inequality
Gender
DEFERENCE
Women engage in more nonverbal displays of deferenceLaFrance et al. (2003) PB; Leffler et al. (1982) SPQ; Dovidio et al. (1988) JPSP
RESOURCES
Women earn only 77% of what men earn White House (2014)
OPPORTUNITIES
Male entrepreneurial pitches funded twice as often aspitches by womenBrooks et al. (2014) PNAS
EVALUATION
Males evaluated more favorably than females for a lab positionMoss-Racusin et al. (2012) PNAS
Systems of Inequality
Race
DEFERENCE
Black respondents defer to White partner’s judgment more than vice-versaWebster and Driskell (1978) ASR
RESOURCES
Blacks and Hispanics make less than 75% of the median income of Whites
and receive smaller pay increasesBureau of Labor Statistics, 2010; Castilla (2008) AJS
OPPORTUNITIES
A resume with a stereotypically White name receives more callbacks than a
stereotypical Black nameBertrand & Mullainathan (2004) AER
EVALUATION
White leaders are evaluated more favorably than non-White leadersRosette et al. (2008) JAP
Systems of Inequality
Power
RESOURCES
CEOs influence their own remuneration relative to less powerful managers Allen (1981); Wade et al. (2006) Org Science
OPPORTUNITIES
Managers who begin in more powerful departments are promoted fasterSheridan et al. (1990) AMJ
EVALUATION
Observers evaluate supervisors as more competent than subordinates Georgesen & Harris (1998) PSPR; Sande et al. (1986) JPSP
DEFERENCE
Low-power individuals interrupt more than high-power individualsLeffler et al. (1982) SPQ
PREMISE 2:
Agency and communion are two
fundamental orientations that guide
behavior
Connection with others
Getting along
Focus on warmth
Communal OrientationAgentic Orientation
Separation from others
Getting ahead
Focus on achievement
Measure of Agentic-Communal Goal PursuitDiekman et al. (2013)
Orthogonal Modes of Being
Communion
Ag
en
cy
Agentic Orientation
• Self-focused
• Achievement
• Mastery
Communal
Orientation
• Other-focused
• Social connection
• Helping others
Outcomes
• Perspective-taking
• Empathy
• Goal pursuit
• Overconfidence
• Spending behavior
• Unethical behavior
Agentic-Communal Model of Inequality
MAIN PROPOSITION
MIAN PROPOSITIONS
Proposition 1: Being higher in a social hierarchy
fosters a sense of advantage that orients an
individual towards agency
Proposition 2: Being lower in a social hierarchy
fosters a sense of disadvantage that orients an
individual towards communion
Systems
• Social Class
• Gender
• Race
• Power
Agentic Orientation
• Self-focused
• Achievement
• Mastery
Communal
Orientation
• Other-focused
• Social connection
• Helping others
Outcomes
• Perspective-taking
• Empathy
• Goal pursuit
• Overconfidence
• Spending behavior
• Unethical behavior
Elements
• Resources
• Deference
• Evaluations
• Opportunities
Inequality
Sense of
Advantage
Sense of
Disadvantage
Agentic-Communal Model of Inequality
Evidence for Agency &
Communion in Social Class
Lower Class Individuals are More Communal
Stephens et al. (2007) JPSP
Lower Class Better Identify Others’ Emotions
Kraus et al., 2010, Psych Science
23
24
25
26
27
28
Lower Class Upper Class
Stereotype Threat
40
45
50
55
60
Lower Class Upper Class
Threat
No Threat
Croizet & Claire, 1998, PSPB
Evidence for Agency &
Communion in Gender
Communion in Social Interaction
Moskowitz et al., 1994, JPSP
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Women Men
Nissan, Shapira & Liberman, 2015, PSPB
23
24
25
26
27
28
Women Men
Women Better Identify Others’ Emotions
Stereotype Threat
0
5
10
15
20
25
Women Men
Threat
No Threat
Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 2001, JESP
Likelihood of Negotiating Salary
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Women Men
Babcock & Laschever (2009) Women Don't Ask
Evidence for Agency &
Communion in Race
Collectivism
3
3.5
4
4.5
White African-American
Latino Asian-American
Gaines et al., 1997, JPSP
Stereotype Threat
0
2
4
6
8
10
Blacks Whites
Threat
No Threat
Steele & Aronson, 1995, JPSP
Evidence for Agency &
Communion in Power
Endorsement of Agentic vs. Communal Goals
Schley et al., In Progress
Nissan, Shapira & Liberman, 2015, PSPB
23
24
25
26
27
28
Low Power High Power
Less Powerful Better Identify Others’ Emotions
Stereotype Threat
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Low Power High Power
Threat
No Threat
Kang et al., 2015, PSPB
Likelihood of Negotiating for Car
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
Low-Power High-Power
Magee, Galinsky, & Gruenfeld (2007) PSPB
When the Disadvantaged are Agentic
PROPOSITION 3a:
The Disadvantaged Are Agentic
When it Signals Status
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
Low Status Product High Status Product
Control Low Power High Power
Low Power Pay More for High-Status Products
Rucker & Galinsky (2008) Journal of Consumer Research
Conspicuous Consumption Charles, Hurst, & Roussanov, 2009, QJE
PROPOSITION 3b:
When Inequality is seen as Illegitimate,
the Disadvantaged become Agentic
Only Legitimate Power Leads to Action
Effect Sizes across Four Experiments
Within legitimacy:
Effect of power
Within illegitimacy:
Effect of power
Meta-analysis M = .27
Z = 3.95
p < .001
M = -.15
Z = -2.16
p = .03
Lammers, Galinsky, Gordijn, & Otten (2008) Psych Science
Women who perceive patriarchy as less legitimate feel more anger
and report a greater intention to participate in collective action Iyer and Ryan (2006) JSIO
When the Advantaged are Communal
PROPOSITION 4:
When individual dispositions or active goals
are communal, advantaged individuals are
oriented toward communion
Communals Become Generous with PowerChen et al. (2001) JPSP
Systems
• Social Class
• Gender
• Race
• Power
Agentic Orientation
• Self-Focused
• Achievement
• Mastery
Communal
Orientation
• Other-focused
• Social connection
• Helping others
Moderators
• Status Seeking Motives
• Legitimacy of Inequality
• Personal Goals
Outcomes
• Perspective-Taking
• Empathy
• Goal Pursuit
• Overconfidence
• Spending Behavior
• Unethical Behavior
Elements
• Resources
• Deference
• Evaluations
• Opportunities
Agentic-Communal Model of Inequality
Inequality
Sense of
Advantage
Sense of
Disadvantage
Inequality Accessibility
Which System of Inequality is Most Accessible?
PROPOSITION 5:
Identification with a group (e.g., social class,
gender, or race) will predict feelings of
relative advantage vs. disadvantage
Systems
• Social Class
• Gender
• Race
• Power
Agentic Orientation
• Self-focused
• Achievement
• Mastery
Communal
Orientation
• Other-focused
• Social connection
• Helping others
Moderators
• Individual differences
• Impression management
• Legitimacy of inequality
• Identification
Outcomes
• Perspective-taking
• Empathy
• Goal pursuit
• Overconfidence
• Spending behavior
• Unethical behavior
Elements
• Resources
• Deference
• Evaluations
• Opportunities
Agentic-Communal Model of Inequality
Inequality
Sense of
Advantage
Sense of
Disadvantage