The power motive predicts influential social behaviour; however, its heterogeneous conceptualisations have produced inconsistent results. To overcome this problem, we developed and validated a unitary taxonomy of social power motives based on established delineations of social hierarchies: the dominance, prestige, and leadership account. While we could measure these motives both reliably and distinctively (study 1), we also showed they strongly related to a common power desire (study 2). Assessing their nomological networks (studies 3 and 4), we demonstrated distinct associations between the dominance motive (D: wanting to coerce others into adhering to one's will) and anger and verbal aggression; the prestige motive (P: wanting to obtain admiration and respect) and the fear of losing reputation and claiming to have higher moral concerns; the leadership motive (L: wanting to take responsibility in and for one's group) and emotional stability and helping behaviour. Furthermore, while D uniquely predicted agonistic/retaliatory behaviour in dictator games (study 5), L uniquely predicted the attainment of higher employment ranks in various professions (study 7). Finally, at least to some degree, P and L related positively, and D negatively to prosocial donating behaviour (study 6). This taxonomy represents a novel and powerful approach to predicting influential social behaviour. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Fairness perception underpins the concept of societal solidarity and is central to regime cohesion, collective identity, and popular legitimacy. The European Union faces challenges on all of these fronts. Perceptions of intergroup (un)fairness and of being "left behind," for example, provided much of the momentum behind the U.K. Brexit decision. Fairness perception is not, however, an objectively reliable measure. In/outgroup alignments, including race and even football team membership, have been shown experimentally to influence individuals' behavior in response to equally fair/unfair monetary offers, even when this behavior is economically irrational. We develop an experimental task, using an adapted ultimatum game design, to examine how this dynamic plays out in the context of multilevel territorial identity systems, such as the European Union (EU), where no straightforward territorial in/outgroup dynamic pertains. We discuss the implications of our findings for understanding complex social-identity effects in multilevel systems. We ask how our findings on differential perceptions of fairness might be built upon to help understand variable citizen perceptions of, for example, the Brexit process and of the outcomes secured by an individuals' "own side" in the negotiations and more generally in relation to psychological attachment to the EU.

No abstract

a b s t r a c tWe all face moral decisions, whether we are judges, politicians, or just riding the bus. The most well studied of these involve concerns of harming or caring for other people, which have often been researched by employing hypothetical moral dilemmas. This study investigated how the explicit power motive, more precisely the hope to gain power (h_Power), predicts decisions for these types of problems. We found that h_Power was positively related to deciding that it was morally acceptable to kill one person to save multiple others (i.e., making a utilitarian choice). In an exploratory analysis, we found that the probability of making such choices as a function of h_Power was even higher when participants' own lives were at stake as compared to only the lives of others. These findings complement previous research showing that personality variables as well as situational factors predict moral decision making. Finding biases in moral decision making is important, as only when we know these biases we can consciously counteract them.