Power corrupts co-operation: cognitive and motivational effects in a double EEG paradigm.

This study investigated the effect of interpersonal power on co-operative performance. We used a paired electro-encephalogram paradigm: pairs of participants performed an attention task, followed by feedback indicating monetary loss or gain on every trial. Participants were randomly allocated to the power-holder, subordinate or neutral group by creating different levels of control over how a joint monetary reward would be allocated. We found that power was associated with reduced behavioural accuracy. Event-related potential analysis showed that power-holders devoted less motivational resources to their targets than did subordinates or neutrals, but did not differ at the level of early conflict detection. Their feedback potential results showed a greater expectation of rewards but reduced subjective magnitude attributed to losses. Subordinates, on the other hand, were asymmetrically sensitive to power-holders' targets. They expected fewer rewards, but attributed greater significance to losses. Our study shows that power corrupts balanced co-operation with subordinates.

[1]  T. Pittman,et al.  Motivation and cognition: Control deprivation and the nature of subsequent information processing☆ , 1989 .

[2]  Ana Guinote,et al.  Behaviour variability and the Situated Focus Theory of Power , 2007 .

[3]  A. Kluger,et al.  The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. , 1996 .

[4]  Xiaolin Zhou,et al.  The P300 and reward valence, magnitude, and expectancy in outcome evaluation , 2009, Brain Research.

[5]  C. Carter,et al.  The Timing of Action-Monitoring Processes in the Anterior Cingulate Cortex , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[6]  D. Kipnis,et al.  Does power corrupt? , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  E. John,et al.  Evoked-Potential Correlates of Stimulus Uncertainty , 1965, Science.

[8]  M. Posner,et al.  Attentional networks , 1994, Trends in Neurosciences.

[9]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. , 2002, Psychological review.

[10]  Adrian R. Willoughby,et al.  The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses , 2002, Science.

[11]  E. Berscheid,et al.  Outcome dependency: Attention, attribution, and attraction. , 1976 .

[12]  V. Johnston,et al.  Multiple P3s to emotional stimuli and their theoretical significance. , 1986, Psychophysiology.

[13]  A. Galinsky,et al.  Lacking Power Impairs Executive Functions , 2008, Psychological science.

[14]  Adam D. Galinsky,et al.  Illegitimacy Moderates the Effects of Power on Approach , 2008, Psychological science.

[15]  A. Sanfey,et al.  Independent Coding of Reward Magnitude and Valence in the Human Brain , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[16]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[17]  Josep Marco-Pallarés,et al.  When decisions of others matter to me: an electrophysiological analysis , 2010, BMC Neuroscience.

[18]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Decision making, the P3, and the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system. , 2005, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  Maarten A. S. Boksem,et al.  Social status determines how we monitor and evaluate our performance. , 2012, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[20]  1 An Introduction to Event-Related Potentials and Their Neural Origins , 2022 .

[21]  S. Fiske,et al.  Controlling other people. The impact of power on stereotyping. , 1993, The American psychologist.

[22]  Cameron Anderson,et al.  Power, Approach, and Inhibition , 2003 .

[23]  J. Polich Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[24]  B. Kopp,et al.  N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control. , 1996, Psychophysiology.

[25]  J. Lupiáñez,et al.  The Boss is Paying Attention: Power Affects the Functioning of the Attentional Networks , 2011 .

[26]  Joe C Magee,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Power and Perspectives Not Taken , 2022 .

[27]  Christian Bellebaum,et al.  It was not MY fault: event-related brain potentials in active and observational learning from feedback. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[28]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Is it really my turn? An event-related fMRI study of task sharing , 2007, Social neuroscience.

[29]  Piotr Jaskowski,et al.  Evidence for an Integrative Role of P3b in Linking Reaction to Perception , 2005 .

[30]  Jun'ichi Katayama,et al.  Self-relevant criteria determine the evaluation of outcomes induced by others , 2008, Neuroreport.

[31]  Jonathan R. Folstein,et al.  Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[32]  C. Braun,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potentials Following Incorrect Feedback in a Time-Estimation Task: Evidence for a Generic Neural System for Error Detection , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[33]  M. Posner,et al.  The attention system of the human brain. , 1990, Annual review of neuroscience.

[34]  Ana Guinote,et al.  Power affects basic cognition: Increased attentional inhibition and flexibility , 2007 .