Scholarly Peer Reviewed Journal Articles on Power Relationships

• Loading metrics

Open Admission

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Authenticity and Human relationship Satisfaction: Two Distinct Ways of Directing Ability to Self-Esteem

Authenticity and Relationship Satisfaction: Ii Singled-out Ways of Directing Power to Self-Esteem

• Yi Nan Wang

x

• Published: Dec 31, 2015
• https://doi.org/x.1371/journal.pone.0146050

Figures

Abstract

Possessing ability contributes to high self-esteem, but how power enhances self-esteem is still unknown. As ability is associated with both self-oriented goals and social-responsibility goals, nosotros proposed that power predicts cocky-esteem through two positive personal and interpersonal results: authenticity and human relationship satisfaction. 3 studies were carried out with a total of 505 Chinese participants, including college students and adults, who completed surveys that assessed personal power, self-esteem, authenticity, relationship satisfaction, communal orientation, and social desirability. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses demonstrated that power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction each uniquely contributed to self-esteem. More importantly, multiple mediation assay showed that authenticity and human relationship satisfaction both mediated the effects of ability on cocky-esteem, even when controlling for participants' communal orientation and social desirability. Our findings demonstrate that actuality and relationship satisfaction represent ii primal mechanisms by which power is associated with cocky-esteem.

Citation: Wang YN (2015) Authenticity and Relationship Satisfaction: Two Distinct Ways of Directing Power to Cocky-Esteem. PLoS I 10(12): e0146050. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146050

Editor: Martin Voracek, University of Vienna, AUSTRIA

Received: August 24, 2015; Accepted: Dec 11, 2015; Published: Dec 31, 2015

Copyright: © 2015 Yi Nan Wang. This is an open admission article distributed under the terms of the Creative Eatables Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original writer and source are credited

Information Availability: All relevant data are within the newspaper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The authors have no support or funding to report.

Competing interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Ability considerations are ubiquitous in daily life [one,2]. Contempo studies bear witness that elevated power can increment self-esteem [3]. Nevertheless, research regarding the ability of power to finer predict self-esteem has been far from conclusive. The current study drew on the theory about two unlike orientations (self-oriented and social-responsibility) associated with power [iv] to investigate whether power predicts cocky-esteem through two distinct pathways: authenticity and relationship satisfaction.

Human relationship between power and self-esteem

Power is typically defined as an individual'due south relative capacity to modify others' states, by providing or withholding resource or administering punishments [2]. The current study focused on personal sense of power referring to a perception of 1's chapters to influence others, rather than control over resources [1]. The relationship between power and self–esteem was originally postulated by Kipnis (1972) who reasoned that ability holders are able to effectively influence others that then leads them to believe that their capacities are superior to other people. In fact, the association between power and cocky–esteem is probably reciprocal. On one hand, heightened self–esteem may pave the style to ability. On the other hand, variations in power may exert influence on self–esteem that is the empirical focus of the current studies. Previous evidence shows that heightened ability can increase self–esteem and lowered power leads to decreases in self–esteem [3]. However, it remains unclear how power relates to self-esteem.

In definition, self-esteem refers to an evaluative response or attitude toward the cocky [v]. According to the sociometer hypothesis [half-dozen], more than an evaluation of ane'due south personal aspect, self-esteem is also related to how people think they are being perceived and evaluated past others. Similarly, high power contributes to both self-interested behavior (e.thousand., behave more consistently with one'southward internal traits, Keltner et al., 2003) and other oriented beliefs (perspective taking and interpersonal sensitivity, Schmid et al., 2009). Theoretically, the realization of one's own desires would contribute to individual'southward positive self-regard. On the other paw, individuals' self-esteem might do good from higher relationship satisfaction due to more than others' acceptance. Hence, we hypothesized that power might atomic number 82 to high self-esteem through perceived positive personal and interpersonal consequences: authenticity and relationship satisfaction, respectively.

Authenticity as a mediator between ability and self-esteem

Contempo research has shown that possessing power tin can increase individuals' actuality, which refers to the degree to which individuals connect with and enact their true desires in diverse situations [seven–9]. Specifically, power will pb people to behave more consistently with their truthful desires [ii,10], allowing them to express their true orientations and dispositions [4,11].

For many years, scholars take argued that authenticity is an important aspect of healthy psychological functioning [12]. Kernis (2003) proposes that experiencing oneself equally authentic provides the ground for experiencing optimal self-esteem. Meanwhile, considerable research indicates that actuality is peculiarly important in promoting self-esteem and life satisfaction [13–xvi]. Other research and theory proposes that ability also contributes to high self-esteem. A meta-analysis revealed a positive correlation betwixt emerging as a leader and self-esteem [17]. Furthermore, it has been found that elevated power elicited by role job can increase self-esteem [3].

In summary, power can increment feelings of actuality, which is of import to self-esteem. Other research and theory has connected power to self-esteem. We link these disparate findings into a causal path from power to authenticity to self-esteem.

Relationship satisfaction every bit a mediator betwixt power and cocky-esteem

Besides authenticity, a previous report showed that ability can also increment interpersonal relationship satisfaction, which refers to personal satisfaction with the quality of one'due south relationship with general or specific others [18]. For instance, possessing high power in romantic relationships (e.g., possessing more resources or controlling say-so) is correlated with greater relationship satisfaction [19]. Meanwhile, high-ability-priming individuals experience more than positive emotions in interpersonal interactions, and in turn have more interpersonal sensitivity [nineteen,20].

Furthermore, human relationship satisfaction is crucial for individuals' cocky-esteem. The sociometer theory argues that self-esteem is not but a individual cocky-evaluation, merely as well reflects the quality of one's relationships with others [half-dozen,21]. For example, social exclusion associated with low human relationship satisfaction can cause decrease in self-esteem [22]. For East Asians, who consider interpersonal relatedness to exist an of import aspect of their well-being, low relationship satisfaction is particularly detrimental to their self-esteem [23,24]. Given that possessing power can increase individuals' satisfaction with interpersonal relationships, which is correlated with self-esteem, a personal sense of power might enhance self-esteem by increasing individuals' relationship satisfaction

Relationship between actuality, relationship satisfaction, power, and self-esteem

In the evolutionary perspective, why humans seek ability is because power is inherently related to social success and relationship with others [25,26] that are important aspects of individuals' cocky-esteem. Thus, we proposed that power tin heighten self-esteem through two positive results: authenticity and relationship satisfaction. The stardom betwixt the two pathways of directing power to self-esteem is consistent with the proposition that people may acquaintance power with both self-oriented and social responsibility goals [4,27]. Chen et al. (2001) proposed that cocky-oriented goals associated with ability elicit behavior focused on promoting 1'due south own needs and interests, while social responsibility goals arm-twist behavior focused on responding to others' views and needs. As positive results of wielding power in two dissimilar manners, authenticity occurs when individuals satisfy their true desires, and satisfied relationships are obtained through acceptance by others due to highly socially responsible behaviors. In turn, both increased authenticity and human relationship satisfaction can enhance individuals' self-esteem. As such, power might increase self-esteem through two distinct pathways: authenticity and relationship satisfaction.

A previous study using participants from Western cultures showed that power enhances an individual'due south well-being or self-esteem through authenticity [3,9]. Still, whether possessing power and actuality leads to positive psychological functioning in East Asian cultures (east.g., Communist china) has yet to exist tested. Information technology has been proposed that Due east Asian and Western cultures vary considerably in the relative emphasis on independence as opposed to interdependence [28]. Considerable evidence shows that Asians are interpersonally attuned as compared to Euro-Americans [29–31]. Because Euro-Americans are independent, their self-evaluation depends relatively more than on inner authentic feelings. Withal, Asians' self-evaluation is based to a greater extent on relationships with others. Hither, nosotros sought to make up one's mind whether authenticity will contribute to Chinese self-esteem, as shown in Western cultures (Kifer et al., 2013). We will further extend Kifer et al.'s (2013) study to decide whether interpersonal relationships as well mediate the effects of power on self-esteem in Chinese participants.

Overview of the Current written report

The current study examined the relationships between personal sense of power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction in the prediction of cocky-esteem amongst Chinese participants. This study aimed to answer ii master questions. Get-go, would ability, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction offer unique contributions to self-esteem in Chinese participants? Second, would actuality and relationship satisfaction both mediate the furnishings of power on self-esteem? To reply these questions, we investigated the relationships between power, authenticity, relationship satisfaction, and cocky-esteem in iii related studies. Specifically, the study ane firstly aimed to examine the human relationship between personal power, authenticity, and human relationship satisfaction in the prediction of self-esteem. Second, considering our participants were all Chinese who were likely to proceed a high sense of communal orientation to maintain skillful relationships with others, the study 2 was to designed to examine whether authenticity and human relationship satisfaction mediated the effects of ability on cocky-esteem when controlling for participants' communal orientation. At last, considering both self-esteem, power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction were related to positive social value, the report iii was designed to examine whether the results of Studies 1 and 2 can be replicated when controlling for participants' level of social desirability.

Study 1

Methods

Participants and process.

The sample comprised 104 college students (46 men, 58 women) who were recruited at a Chinese University. Ages ranged from xviii years to 33 years (M _age = 21.27, SD = 2.82). The study was canonical past the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Normal University. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants, who were instructed to complete a ready of paper-and-pencil questionnaires in the classroom.

Measures.

All questionnaires were presented in their Chinese versions. The English scales were translated into Chinese, according to the standard guidelines, by a native Chinese speaker with English as a second language [32]. To control for society furnishings, we randomized the order of the items within each survey. All ratings were fabricated using 5-bespeak Likert scales, ranging from i (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly hold).

Personal power.

Dispositional power was assessed via the Sense of Power Scale [1]. This 8-item scale asks respondents to report their beliefs about the power they have. A sample detail is 'I think I have a great deal of power' (Cronbach'south alpha = .71).

Self-esteem.

The 10 items of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale was used to appraise participant's overall evaluation of his or her worthiness as a human [33]. A sample item is "On the whole, I am satisfied with myself" (Cronbach'due south alpha = .81).

Authenticity.

A 12-item scale developed by Wood et al. (2008) was used to assess the three facets of authenticity. The iii subscales consist of: cocky-alienation (4 items, due east.m. ''I don't know how I experience inside"), accepting external influences (iv items, east.g. ''I ordinarily do what other people tell me to practise"), and accurate-living (four items, e.grand. ''I ever stand up by what I believe in"). The Cronbach's alpha for total authenticity was .81.

Human relationship satisfaction.

Relationship satisfaction was measured using Burns' (1993) vii-item Human relationship Satisfaction Scale in various areas of the general, not specific, relationship, including communication and openness, conflict resolution, caste of caring and affection, intimacy and closeness, satisfaction with roles in relationship, and overall relationship satisfaction. Respondents indicated their caste of relationship satisfaction with others in full general. A sample item is "Overall, I am satisfied with my relationship" (Cronbach's alpha = .82).

Results

Descriptive statistics and relationship between variables.

A summary of the descriptive statistics and a correlation matrix for the report variables is provided in Tabular array 1. An inspection of the correlations revealed that power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction were all positively related to self-esteem. Meanwhile, gender had no furnishings on individuals' cocky-esteem, ability, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction. Age was weakly correlated with only power (r = .20, p = .04), and was not correlated with cocky-esteem, authenticity, or relationship satisfaction. Hence, both gender and age were non included in afterwards analyses.

Considering the high correlation amongst self-esteem, authenticity, and ability, nosotros performed a confirmatory gene analysis (CFA) which evaluated a ane-cistron solution amongst the iii constructs. The result showed one factor model did not provide adequate fit to the data (χ ² = 418.195, df = 189, CFI = .642, TLI = .602, RMSEA = .109) that revealed cocky-esteem, power, and authenticity might not reverberate the same underlying factor.

Authenticity and relationship mediate the consequence of power on self-esteem.

We used an SPSS macro designed for assessing multiple mediation models [34] to examine whether actuality and relationship satisfaction mediated the effects of power on cocky-esteem. Results showed that actuality was a significant mediator, such that authenticity was positively related to ability (B = .72), which, in turn, was positively related to self-esteem (B = .xxx). Additionally, relationship satisfaction was positively related to both power (B = .36) and self-esteem (B = .29; see Fig i and Table 2). Because the reciprocal relationship between power and self-esteem, nosotros further performed a multiple mediation analysis to examine whether authenticity and relationship satisfaction would mediate the furnishings of self-esteem on personal sense of power. The upshot shows that authenticity and relationship satisfaction might non mediate the effects of self-esteem on personal sense of power (BCa 95% CI: -.05 - .20).

Fig 1. A mutiple arbitration model of the clan between power and self-esteem via actuality and relationship satisfaction (n = 104).

Notation: Path estimates are standardized. **p < .01, ***p < .001.

https://doi.org/x.1371/journal.pone.0146050.g001

Although the result of Written report i was consistent with our hypothesized model, it is possible that the interrelations of the constructs could likewise be described past unlike models. I possibility is that actuality and relationship satisfaction played different roles in the prediction of individuals' power to their self-esteem. Specifically, authenticity might mediate the effect of power on the cocky-esteem just when participants' relationship satisfaction is higher. Then, relationship satisfaction might mediate the effect of power on the cocky-esteem only when participants' authenticity is higher. To exclude the possibility that authenticity (or relationship satisfaction) moderated the arbitration effect of human relationship satisfaction (or authenticity) between power and cocky-esteem, we tested two alternative models using the PROCESS macro designed for assessing multiple models [34]. Alternative A: We tested a plausible model that actuality moderated the mediation effect of human relationship satisfaction between ability and self-esteem. The result showed that the conditional indirect effect of power on self-esteem through human relationship satisfaction was not significant (power x actuality: t (104) = -.24, p = .81). Alternative B: We tested a plausible model that relationship satisfaction chastened the arbitration outcome of authenticity in the prediction of power to self-esteem. The result showed that the conditional indirect upshot of power on cocky-esteem through authenticity was also not meaning (power ten relationship satisfaction: t (104) = .37, p = .71). Thus, 2 alternative models that suggested authenticity (or relationship satisfaction) played a moderation part in the human relationship between ability and cocky-esteem were rejected.

The results of Study ane showed that power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction contributed to self-esteem independently in Chinese college students. More importantly, both authenticity and relationship satisfaction mediated the effects of power on self-esteem.

Report ii

Chen et al. (2001) proposed that individuals with loftier communal orientation associate power with social responsibility goals. Meanwhile, Chinese participants are likely to keep a high sense of communal orientation to maintain practiced relationships with others. Therefore, communal orientation might confound the furnishings of relationship satisfaction in predicting self-esteem from power. The first aim of Study 2 was to examine whether authenticity and relationship satisfaction mediate the effects of power on self-esteem when controlling for participants' communal orientation. The second aim of Study two was to examine whether the results of Study 1 can exist generalized to adults.

Methods

Participants and procedure.

We recruited 191 adult Chinese participants from a professional person website offering paid online tasks (male person = 95, M _age = 33.26, SD = six.04). The report was canonical by the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Normal University. After having read the report information, participants so indicated their agreement with the study protocol and procedure past signifying their consent online.

Measures.

All ratings were made using v-point Likert scales, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). To control for order effects, nosotros randomized the lodge of the items inside each survey.

Communal orientation.

The xiv-item Communal Orientation Scale [35] was used to assess the degree to which a person values communally oriented interpersonal relationships past behaving communally. A sample detail is "I expect people I know to be responsive to my needs and feelings" (Cronbach'due south blastoff = .67).

We used the same measures of personal power (Cronbach's alpha = .73), self-esteem (Cronbach's alpha = .78), authenticity (Cronbach's alpha = .lxxx), and relationship satisfaction (Cronbach's alpha = .83) every bit those used in Written report one.

Results

The descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for all variables are presented in Table 3. As study 1 showed, power, actuality, and relationship satisfaction were all positively related to self-esteem. The communal orientation was positively correlated with relationship satisfaction, merely had no association with ability, actuality, or cocky-esteem. Meanwhile, both gender and age had no effects on individuals' self-esteem, power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction like study 1, hence nosotros did not include age and gender in later analysis.

Equally study 1, we likewise performed a CFA which evaluated a 1-factor solution amidst the constructs of self-esteem, ability, and authenticity. The upshot showed that one factor model did non provide adequate fit to the data (χ ⁱⁱ = 593.150, df = 189, CFI = .678, TLI = .643, RMSEA = .106) that showed that self-esteem, power, and authenticity might not reverberate the same underlying cistron.

Finally, we used an SPSS macro designed for assessing multiple mediation models [34] to examine whether authenticity and human relationship satisfaction mediate the effects of power on cocky-esteem when controlling for participants' communal orientation. The results showed that actuality was a significant mediator, such that power was positively related to authenticity (B = .77), which, in turn, was positively related to self-esteem (B = .28) (meet Fig ii). Additionally, human relationship satisfaction was positively related to both power (B = .52) and self-esteem (B = .45). These results indicated that the association between power and cocky-esteem could exist explained by both actuality and human relationship satisfaction, even when controlling for communal orientation (run into Table 4).

Fig ii. A mutiple mediation model of the association between power and self-esteem via actuality and relationship satisfaction when controlling of communal orientation (north = 191).

Note: Path estimates are unstandardized. **p < .01, ***p < .001.

https://doi.org/ten.1371/periodical.pone.0146050.g002

Furthermore, the 2 alternative models were also examined equally Study i. The results showed that the conditional indirect result of power on self-esteem through relationship satisfaction was non meaning (ability x authenticity: t (191) = .37, p = .71), meanwhile the provisional indirect result of power on self-esteem through actuality was not pregnant (power x relationship satisfaction: t (191) = -1.25, p = .21) when decision-making for participants' communal orientation. Hence, two culling models that suggested authenticity (or human relationship satisfaction) played a moderation role in the relationship between power and cocky-esteem were rejected.

Study 3

To determine whether the multiple arbitration furnishings of authenticity and relationship satisfaction in predicting power from self-esteem can be explained by participants' social desirability responses, the aim of Study 3 was to examine whether the results of Studies 1 and 2 can exist replicated when controlling for participants' level of social desirability.

Methods

Participants and procedure.

We recruited 210 developed Chinese participants from a professional person website offering paid online tasks (One thousand _age = 31.90, SD = seven.43). Participants varied considerably in profession (for example, 7.1% students, 16% administrative staffs, and 22% managerial personnel), socioeconomic condition (from RMB k to 20,000 monthly income), education (ranging from 9.1% high school degree to thirteen% master's degree), and professional seniority (50% simple and 42% senior). The written report was approved past the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Normal University. After having read the study information, participants indicated their agreement with the report protocol and procedure by signifying their consent online.

Measures.

All ratings were made using five-point Likert scales, ranging from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly concur). To command for order effects, we randomized the gild of the items within each survey.

Social desirability.

To reduce participant burden as much as possible, nosotros used the five-item Social Desirability Response Set-v [36] to assess the degree to which a person behaves in a socially approved manner. A sample detail is "I am always courteous even to people who are disagreeable" (Cronbach'due south blastoff = .78).

Nosotros used the same measures of personal power (Cronbach's alpha = .88), self-esteem (Cronbach's blastoff = .90), authenticity (Cronbach'southward alpha = .93), and human relationship satisfaction (Cronbach'southward alpha = .93) as those used in Study ane.

Results

The descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for all variables are presented in Table five. Every bit predicted, power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction were all positively related to both self-esteem and social desirability. Meanwhile, age had no furnishings on individuals' self-esteem, power, authenticity, and relationship satisfaction like study 1, hence we did not include historic period in later on analysis.

Every bit study 1 and 2, nosotros performed a CFA which evaluated a one-gene solution among the constructs of self-esteem, ability, and authenticity. The outcome showed that one factor model did not provide adequate fit to the data (χ ² = 1084.003, df = 189, CFI = .705, TLI = .672, RMSEA = .151) that showed that self-esteem, power, and authenticity might not reflect the same underlying factor.

Then, nosotros used an SPSS macro designed for assessing multiple arbitration models [34] to examine whether authenticity and relationship satisfaction mediate the effects of power on self-esteem when controlling for participants' social desirability. The results showed that authenticity was a meaning mediator, such that power was positively related to authenticity (B = .75), which, in turn, was positively related to self-esteem (B = .33) (encounter Fig 3). Additionally, relationship satisfaction was positively related to both power (B = .56) and self-esteem (B = .55). These results indicated that the clan between power and self-esteem could be explained past both authenticity and human relationship satisfaction, fifty-fifty when controlling for social desirability (come across Table 6).

Fig 3. A mutiple mediation model of the clan between power and self-esteem via actuality and relationship satisfaction when controlling of social desirability (n = 210).

Note: Path estimates are unstandardized. **p < .01, ***p < .001.

https://doi.org/ten.1371/journal.pone.0146050.g003

Furthermore, the ii alternative models were also examined every bit Study one and 2. The results showed that the conditional indirect effect of ability on self-esteem through relationship satisfaction was not meaning (power x authenticity: t (210) = -.40, p = .69), meanwhile the conditional indirect effect of power on self-esteem through authenticity was non meaning (power 10 relationship satisfaction: t (210) = -i.04, p = .thirty) when controlling for participants' social desirability. Hence, ii alternative models that suggested authenticity (or human relationship satisfaction) played a moderation role in the relationship betwixt power and self-esteem were rejected.

Discussion

The present report investigated whether authenticity and relationship satisfaction mediate the effects of power on self-esteem in Chinese participants. The results of the three studies are consistent with our hypothesis that power, actuality, and relationship satisfaction each provide a unique contribution in predicting self-esteem. More importantly, multiple mediation analyses revealed that both actuality and relationship satisfaction mediate the effects of power on cocky-esteem, even when controlling for participants' communal orientation and social desirability. This finding offers the outset evidence for the mediating function of authenticity and relationship satisfaction in the power of power to predict self-esteem in a sample of Chinese people. This finding further contributes to understanding how ability finer predicts self-esteem.

In demonstrating the proposed associations, our results contribute to the literature in ii important ways. First, nosotros have replicated much of the work of Kifer et al. (2013), who examined conceptually similar constructs describing how power leads to improved life satisfaction through the pathway of authenticity. The unique contribution of authenticity and relationship satisfaction to Chinese self-esteem reveals that Chinese individuals practice non conceal true desires or feelings to maintain harmonious relationship with others and and then raise positive self-regard.

We likewise extended Kifer et al.'s (2013) findings by revealing relationship satisfaction as another independent mediator of the power of ability to predict self-esteem. Traditionally, conceptual and operational definitions of power have focused on command over others [1] equally encouraging people to bear more authentically [10,xi] and enhancing their well-being [9]. Otherwise, power is a social-relational concept, and an individual'southward ability can merely be understood in relation with other individuals [ane]. This is peculiarly true for East Asians, who consider interpersonal relatedness to exist very important in their daily lives [23,24]. For this reason, human relationship satisfaction, likewise every bit actuality, was found to mediate the human relationship between ability and self-esteem in Chinese participants.

Several aspects of the present inquiry warrant further investigation. Commencement, our measures focused primarily on self-reported personal power, as opposed to positional ability or need for power. Future research should test the generalizability of our findings by using more objective measures of power, such as socioeconomic status, hierarchies, or contextual power [4], and test whether people's desire for power is composed of desires for cocky-authenticity and relationship satisfaction. Furthermore, the self-reported data might be a main reason that leads to the high correlation between self-esteem and ability. To reveal the true relationship between self-esteem and ability, future study was suggested to use more than objective indices to measure individuals' power and self-esteem, such every bit other's evaluation or implicit self-esteem. The 2d limitation is the cross-exclusive pattern brand information technology impossible to describe causal conclusions. Time to come longitudinal studies volition contribute to promoting a comprehensive understanding of the relationships among power, self-esteem, actuality, and relationship satisfaction. Third, considering all our participants are Chinese and the lack of cross-cultural data, information technology is needed for future research to test for cross-cultural differences in the effects of power on authenticity/relationship satisfaction and self-esteem.

In determination, the current report offers an integrated model to interpret how diverse components of self-esteem co-vary within individuals. Such a model advances our understanding of how power predicts self-esteem. We await that this study and the proposed model will provide a foundation that future research can build upon in order to address these and other issues regarding power and self-esteem.

Supporting Information

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: YNW. Performed the experiments: YNW. Analyzed the data: YNW. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: YNW. Wrote the paper: YNW.

References

1. one. Anderson C, John O, Keltner D (2012) The personal sense of ability. Journal of Personality eighty: 313–344. pmid:21446947
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
2. 2. Keltner D, Gruenfeld D, Anderson C (2003) Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review 110: 265–284. pmid:12747524
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
3. 3. Wojciszke B, Struzynska-Kujalowicz A (2007) Power influences cocky-esteem. Social Cognition 25: 472–494.
   • View Article
   • Google Scholar
4. iv. Chen S, Lee-Chai AY, Bargh JA (2001) Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80: 173–187. pmid:11220439
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
5. 5. Tesser A (2001) Chapter Twenty-Two. Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intraindividual processes: 479.
   • View Article
   • Google Scholar
6. 6. Leary MR, Downs DL (1995) Interpersonal functions of the self-esteem motive. Efficacy, bureau, and cocky-esteem: Springer. pp. 123–144.
7. 7. Ryan R, Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American psychologist 55: 68. pmid:11392867
   • View Commodity
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
8. 8. Kernis MH (2003) Toward a conceptualization of optimal cocky-esteem. Psychological Enquiry 14: 1–26.
   • View Article
   • Google Scholar
9. ix. Kifer Y, Heller D, Perunovic Due west, Galinsky Advertisement (2013) The good life of the powerful: The experience of power and authenticity enhances subjective well-being. Psyhological Scientific discipline 24: 280–288.
   • View Article
   • Google Scholar
10. 10. Galinsky Ad, Gruenfeld DH, Magee JC (2003) From power to action. Journal of personality and social psychology 85: 453. pmid:14498782
    • View Commodity
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
11. 11. Galinsky Advertizing, Magee J, Gruenfeld D, Whitson J, Liljenquist One thousand (2008) Power reduces the press of the state of affairs: Implications for inventiveness, conformity, and dissonace. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95: 1450–1466. pmid:19025295
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
12. 12. Rogers C (1961) On condign a person: A therapist's view of psychotherapy. London: Constable.
13. thirteen. Koole SL, Kuhl J (2003) In search of the real self: A functional perspective on optimal self-esteem and authenticity. Psychological Inquiry: 43–48.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
14. 14. Wood A, Linley P, Maltby J, Baliousis M, Joseph South (2008) The authentic personality: A theoretical and empirical conceptuliztion and the development of the actuality scale. Periodical of Counseling Psychology 55: 385–399.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
15. 15. Goldman BM, Kernis MH (2002) The role of authenticity in healthy psychological functioning and subjective well-being. Register of the American Psychotherapy Association 5: 18–20.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
16. 16. Sheldon K, Ryan RM, Rawsthorne LJ, Ilardi B (1997) Trait self and true self: Cantankerous-function variation in the Big-Five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective well-existence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73: 1380–1393.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
17. 17. Judge TA, Bono JE, Ilies R, Gerhardt MW (2002) Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of practical psychology 87: 765.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
18. eighteen. Wang YN (2014) Ability, communion and satisfaction: Authenticity every bit a common mediator in China. Asian Journal of Social Psychology.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
19. 19. Bentley CG, Galliher RV, Ferguson TJ (2007) Associations Among Aspects of Interpersonal Power and Relationship Functioning in Adolescent Romantic Couples. Sexual activity Roles 57: 483–495. pmid:18776943
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
20. 20. Schmid Mast 1000, Jonas K, Hall JA (2009) Give a person power and he or she will show interpersonal sensitivity: The phenomenon and its why and when. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97: 835–850. pmid:19857005
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
21. 21. Leary MR (2003) Interpersonal aspects of optimal cocky-esteem and the accurate cocky. Psychological Inquiry: 52–54.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
22. 22. Leary MR, Tambor ES, Terdal SK, Downs DL (1995) Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of personality and social psychology 68: 518.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
23. 23. Kitayama S, Markus 60 minutes (2000) The pursuit of happiness and the realization of sympathy: Cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-existence. Civilization and subjective well-existence: 113–161.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
24. 24. Uchida Y, Norasakkunkit V, Kitayama S (2004) Cultural constructions of happiness: Theory and emprical evidence. Journal of happiness studies 5: 223–239.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
25. 25. Buss DM (1989) Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and brain sciences 12: 1–14.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
26. 26. Trivers R (1972) Parental investment and sexual pick. In: Campell B, editor. Sexual pick and the descent of man. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. pp. 136–179.
27. 27. Clark MS, Mills J (1979) Interpersonal allure in exchange and communal relationships. Periodical of Personality and Social Psychology 37: 12–24.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
28. 28. Markus H, Kitayama Due south (1991) Civilization and the cocky: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98: 224–253.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
29. 29. Kitayama Due south, Markus 60 minutes, Matsumoto H, Norasakkunkit Five (1997) Individual and collective processes in the construction of the self: cocky-enhancement in the United States and cocky-criticism in Japan. Journal of personality and social psychology 72: 1245. pmid:9177018
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
30. 30. Kitayama S, Markus HR (2000) The pursuit of happiness and the realization of sympathy: Cultural patterns of self, social relations, and well-being. Culture and subjective well-existence: The MIT Printing, Cambridge, MA. pp. 113–161.
31. 31. Uchida Y, Kitayama South, Mesquita B, Rayes J. Interpersonal sources of happiness: The relative significance in three cultures; 2001.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
32. 32. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25: 3186–3191. pmid:11124735
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
33. 33. Rosenberg M (1965) Rosenberg self-esteem scale (RSE). Credence and Commitment Therapy Measures Package: 61.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
34. 34. Preacher KJ, Hayes A (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessingand comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods 40: 879–891. pmid:18697684
    • View Commodity
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
35. 35. Clark MS, Oullette R, Powell MC, Milberg S (1987) Recipient's mood, relationship type, and helping. Periodical of Personality and Social Psychology 53: 94–103. pmid:3612495
    • View Commodity
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
36. 36. Hays RD, Hayashi T, Stewart AL (1989) A five-item measure of socially desirable response set. Educational and psychological measurement 49: 629–636.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar

waltzmostor.blogspot.com

Source: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0146050

Share this post