1
The Power of Being Yourself: The Experience of Authenticity Enhances Power
Wide-ranging research indicates that people’s sense of social power—their sense of
being able to influence others through the control of valued resources (Fiske, 2010; Keltner,
Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003)—shapes the worlds people inhabit. Specifically, the powerful
reside in resource-rich environments, are largely self-sufficient, and encounter few social
constraints, whereas the powerless live in impoverished environments, characterized by fewer
resources, as well as social constraints and potential threats (Keltner et al., 2003; Lammers,
Galinsky, Gordijn, & Otten, 2012). What’s more, these vastly differing realities experienced by
the powerless and the powerful appear to perpetuate power differences, such that power begets
power (Magee & Galinsky, 2008). Essentially, having power alters how people think and
behave, in ways that support the acquisition and retention of power, just as a lack of power does
the opposite.
If so, an important question arises – How might an individual experience gains in feelings
of power, especially when she was not powerful to begin with? The present research examined
whether certain kinds of behaviors can alter one’s sense of power. In line with self-perception
theory (Bem, 1972), we proposed that behaving authentically—that is, in line with one’s
inwardly experienced desires and values (Harter, 2002; Sheldon, Ryan, Rawsthorne, & Ilardi,
1997), which embodies how the powerful act (Kifer, Heller, Perunovic, & Galinsky, 2013;
Kraus, Chen, & Keltner, 2011) may enhance power. Six experiments (total N = 838) yielded
support for this hypothesis. Specifically, participants reported feeling more powerful when
visualizing themselves behaving authentically relative to inauthentically (Study 1) or recalling
actual authentic, versus inauthentic, experiences (Studies 2-4). Studies 3 and 4 showed further
2
that this authenticity-to-power link was mediated by a reduced fear of rejection for expressing
one’s true self. Fear of rejection was manipulated in Study 5 to document the causal impact of a
reduced fear of rejection on feelings of power. Finally, Study 6 extended the prior studies into
the realm of social perception, demonstrating that people infer others’ power from their acts of
authenticity. Alternative explanations such as pre-existing power differences and positive affect
were ruled out.
These findings are consistent with converging evidence suggesting that because certain
actions are associated with power (e.g., abstract thinking, rule breaking), the behaviors
themselves come to serve as signals or cues of power for the powerholder him- or herself, as well
as for perceivers (Magee, 2009; Ridgeway, Berger, & Smith, 1985; Wakslak, Smith, & Han,
2014; Van Kleef, Homan, Finkenauer, Güendemir, & Stamkou, 2011). For example, when
people are induced to think abstractly, they experience greater feelings of power (Smith,
Wigboldus, & Dijksterhuis, 2008), as well as when people observe others think abstractly they
are perceived as more powerful (Wakslak et al., 2014). The current research identifies
authenticity as a signal, to the self and to others, of having power and thereby enhances
subjective feelings and perceptions of power.
Recent research indicates that power breeds authenticity (Kifer et al., 2013; Kraus et al.,
2011), suggesting that people associate power with behaving authentically. The current research
extended this notion by demonstrating that the converse is also true—that the experience of
authenticity enhances power. This finding has several implications: First, it advances the
authenticity literature, pointing out the benefits of state (rather than trait) authenticity.
Second, it demonstrates that there is a bi-directional relationship between authenticity and
power. Being powerless restricts the extent to which people express their true self, which in turn
3
thwarts feeling and being seen as powerful. Essentially, authenticity appears to be one way in
which power is self-reinforcing (see also Magee & Galinsky, 2008; Smith et al., 2008; Van Kleef
et al., 2011), and thus may contribute over time to the maintenance of power hierarchies.
Finally, our results also suggest that authenticity may offer a behavioral means by which
to gain power. Whereas research on what leads to rises in power has traditionally focused on
fixed characteristics of the individual such as gender, race, physical attributes, and personality
traits (Anderson & Brion, 2014; Anderson, John, Keltner, & Kring, 2001; Anderson & Kilduff,
2009), the current set of studies aligns with more recent work in looking at behaviors that alter
feelings and perceptions of power (Smith et al., 2008; Wakslak et al., 2014; Van Kleef et al.,
2011), for both people dispositionally low and high in power. Thus, it has the potential to
challenge the stability of power differences in current society.
4
References
Anderson, C., & Brion, S. (2014). Perspectives on power in organizations. Annual Review of
Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 67-97.
Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects
of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 81, 116–132.
Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. (2009). Why do dominant personalities attain influence in groups?
A competence-signaling account of personality dominance. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 96, 491–503.
Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-Perception Theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental
social psychology (pp.1-62). New York: Academic Press.
Fiske, S. T. (2010). Interpersonal stratification: Status, power, and subordination. In S. T. Fiske,
D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (5th ed., pp. 941982). New York, NY: Wiley.
Harter, S. (2002). Authenticity. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive
psychology (pp. 382–394). New York: Oxford University Press.
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition.
Psychological Review, 110, 265–284.
Kifer, Y., Heller, D., Perunovic, W.Q.E., & Galinsky, A.D. (2013). The good life of the
powerful: The experience of power and authenticity enhances subjective well-being.
Psychological Science, 24(3), 280-288.
Kraus, M. W., Chen, S., & Keltner, D. (2011). The power to be me: Power elevates self-concept
consistency and authenticity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 974-980.
5
Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2012). Power increases social
distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 282–290.
Magee, J. C. (2009). Seeing power in action: The roles of deliberation, implementation, and
action in inferences of power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1-14.
Magee, J. C. & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power
and status. Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351-398.
Ridgeway, C. L., Berger, J., & Smith, L. (1985). Nonverbal cues and status: An expectation
states approach. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 955-978.
Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R. M., Rawsthorne, L. J., & Ilardi, B. (1997). Trait self and true self:
Cross-role variation in the big-five personality traits and its relations with psychological
authenticity and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
73(6), 1380-1393.
Smith, P. K., Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2008). Abstract thinking increases one’s
sense of power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 378-385.
Van Kleef, G. A., Homan, A. C., Finkenauer, C., Gündemir, S., & Stamkou, E. (2011). Breaking
the rules to rise to power: How norm violators gain power in the eyes of others. Social
Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 500-507.
Wakslak, C.J., Smith, P.K., & Han, A. (2014). Using abstract language signals power. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 41-55.