The present study examined the effects of gender and status on the use of power strategies. The experiment consisted of a computer-based problem-solving task performed in pairs, where participants interacted with simulated long-distance partners. Participants were 36 female and 38 male undergraduate students, who were assigned to be influencing agents and were required to convince their partners to accept their help in the problem-solving process. Status was manipulated by the extent to which partners were dependent upon the participants' resources. Partners were either same sex or other sex. Results indicated an interactive effect of agent gender by status. Men used more frequently 'masculine'-typed and less frequently 'feminine'-typed strategies than did women in low status positions, whereas in high status positions no significant gender differences in power strategy choices were found. These findings suggest that gender differences and similarities vary according to social contexts. Implications of the findings for both theory and practice are discussed.

Studies of social power use have frequently employed self‐report instruments that are prone to response bias. In the present study, an experimental design was conducted in which 100 participants were asked to gain compliance from in‐group and out‐group members. We tested whether harsh tactics—often used for elevating self‐image at the dyadic level—also provide a means for gaining advantage at the group level. For this purpose, self‐esteem and self‐efficacy were examined as possible moderators. Findings indicated that self‐esteem interacted with target group: Low self‐esteem participants used harsh tactics more frequently toward in‐group than out‐group members; and moderate and high self‐esteem participants used harsh tactics more frequently toward out‐group than in‐group members. The process involved in this interaction is discussed.