↓ Skip to main content

Power boosts reliance on preferred processing styles

Overview of attention for article published in Motivation and Emotion, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Power boosts reliance on preferred processing styles
Published in
Motivation and Emotion, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11031-016-9548-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Małgorzata Kossowska, Ana Guinote, Paweł Strojny

Abstract

A significant amount of research has proposed that power leads to heuristic and category based information processing, however, the evidence is often contradictory. We propose the novel idea that power magnifies chronically accessible information processing styles which can contribute to either systematic or heuristic processing. We examine heuristic (vs. systematic) processing in association with the need for closure. The results of three studies and a meta-analysis supported these claims. Power increased heuristic information processing, manifested in the recognition of schema consistent information, in the use of stereotypical information to form impressions and decreased the complexity of categorical representations, but only for those participants who, by default, processed information according to simplified heuristics, i.e., are high in need for closure. For those who prefer this processing style less, i.e., low in need for closure, power led to the opposite effects. These findings suggest that power licenses individuals to rely on their dominant information processing strategies, and that power increases interpersonal variability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Researcher 6 15%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Professor 3 8%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 50%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,973,867
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Motivation and Emotion
#490
of 792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,596
of 301,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Motivation and Emotion
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.