"It doesn't matter if you are in charge of the trees, you always miss the trees for the forest": Power and the illusion of explanatory depth

Power can increase overconfidence and illusory thinking. We investigated whether power is also related to the illusion of explanatory depth (IOED), people's tendency to think they understand the world in more detail, coherence, and depth than they actually do. Abstract thinking was reported as a reason for the IOED, and according to the social distance theory of power, power increases abstract thinking. We linked these literatures and tested construal style as a mediator. Further, predispositions can moderate effects of power and we considered narcissism as a candidate because narcissism leads to overconfidence and may thus increase the IOED especially in combination with high power. In three preregistered studies (total N = 607), we manipulated power or measured feelings of power. We found evidence for the IOED (regarding explanatory knowledge about devices). Power led to general overconfidence but had only a small impact on the IOED. Power and narcissism had a small interactive effect on the IOED. Meta-analytical techniques suggest that previous findings on the construal-style-IOED link show only weak evidential value. Implications refer to research on management, power, and overconfidence.

Perceptions of Collaborations: How Many Cooks Seem to Spoil the Broth?

Workers often work in groups of varying sizes, and those workers’ work is often judged by others. To examine how the two might relate, we first asked respondents to report the optimal number of collaborators for a variety of different tasks, finding substantial variability across tasks (Supplementary Study) that tracked with perceived task complexity (Study 1). Accordingly, framing a given task as more complex made people want more collaborators collaborating on it (Study 2), and believing that a task had been performed by the right number of collaborators—neither too few nor too many—fostered more favorable evaluations of both simulated (Study 3) and real (Study 4) experience with the collaborative output. The results of this collaboration suggest that perceivers hold an optimal size in mind when thinking about collaborations and that collaborative work benefits from ostensibly hitting this mark.

Power and cognitive functioning

Because powerful people's thinking is impactful, it is critical to understand how power affects cognition. We detail how recent empirical findings reveal that power often improves cognitive functioning. First, power increases controlled processing, in particular intentionality. Second, power improves executive functioning, leading individuals to exhibit better inhibition, working memory, and cognitive flexibility. Third, power increases abstract thinking. Synthesizing these last two points, we propose that high-power individuals' executive functions are enhanced due to their more abstract way of thinking. Both the greater social distance and reduced cognitive vigilance accompanying increased power could explain these effects. Finally, we note remaining questions, such as how much power's cognitive effects are driven by a subjective sense of power versus objective control.

Power and moral thinking

This review synthesizes research on how feelings of power affect the processing of moral information. Although power is typically viewed as a potentially corruptive force that reduces our morality, we propose that power amplifies moral thinking - but does so in different ways that potentially run in opposite directions. Building on the Moral Orientation Scale framework [1^•], we propose that power increases the tendency to deliberate about moral questions, increases the tendency to integrate feelings and cognitions, and increases the adherence to principles and rules. Feelings of power do not corrupt, but lead to a more rich, mature, and multifaceted form of morality.