The Stereotypic Behaviors of the Powerful and Their Effect on the Relatively Powerless

Power is often coveted, fought over, and fiercely protected. Some have suggested that power corrupts people (e.g., Lord Acton). Others have suggested that foolish people corrupt power (e.g., George Bernard Shaw). Regardless of whether power corrupts people or people corrupt power, inquiries typically have focused on who seeks and secures power over whom and with what adverse consequences. Because power and social group membership historically have been and continue to be confounded in most societies, social scholars and commentators long have been interested in the potentially corruptive and status quo maintaining relation of power to stereotyping. In the United States, for instance, 36% of employed Whites are in management and professional positions, compared to only 26% of employed African Americans and 17% of Latinos. In addition, although women made up 46% of the U.S. labor force in 2004 and have higher salaries than in the past (e.g., women’s median weekly earnings were a full 80% of men’s; U.S. Department of Labor & Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2005), gender equity is confined to middle management positions in feminized or gender-neutral domains. Striking gender disparities remain among the ranks of the powerful in traditionally masculine domains, where the attributes predictive of success are stereotypically associated with men but not women. For example, only 23% of the chief executives, 6% of construction managers, and 6% of engineering managers are women (U.S. Department of Labor & Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2005). Thus, White men are more likely to hold positions of power than are women and minorities. In addition, if power corrupts people or foolish people corrupt power, stereotypes may influence the judgments and behaviors of the powerful in ways that effectively reinforce and maintain the status quo (e.g., Fiske, 1993; Jost & Banaji, 1994; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994). The goals of this chapter are twofold. First, we review prior theory and research on power and stereotyping to highlight core conceptualizations, foundational assumptions, classic findings, and the social contexts of interest. Our review and critique of prior theory and research, in the first half of this chapter, allows us to address a series of background questions. These include: What is power? Who traditionally has power? How does power shape thoughts and behaviors? How does power generally influence stereotyping and discrimination? Second, we present a broader theoretical perspective to elucidate both the causes and consequences of the stereotypic actions of powerful people. In the second half of the chapter, we link the basic human motives to belong and be legitimate to situations involving power differentials and note how this may shape the goals of highand lowpower people. After integrating considerations of basic human motives and situations with power differentials, we present theoretical propositions that provide the foundation for what we refer to as a goal-situated model of power and stereotyping. U.S. Department of Labor & Bureau of Labor Statistics (2005) is not given in your references. Please either add a full entry there or delete the citation here. U.S. Department of Labor & Bureau of Labor Statistics (2005) is not given in your references. Please either add a full entry there or delete the citation here.