Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36908649›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Avoidant authority: The effect of organizational power on decision-making in high-uncertainty situations.

Neil D Shortland, Maureen E McCusker, Laurence Alison, Nikki Blacksmith, Matthew P Crayne, Lisa Thompson, Joseph Gonzales, Presley McGarry, Catherine Stevens

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Neil D ShortlandSchool of Criminology and Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, United States.
Maureen E McCuskerInstitutional Research and Decision Support, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, United States.
Laurence AlisonInstitute for Risk and Uncertainty, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Nikki BlacksmithSchool of Business, University at Albany, Albany, NY, United States.
Matthew P CrayneDepartment of Management, American University, Washington, DC, United States.
Lisa ThompsonSchool of Criminology and Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, United States.
Joseph GonzalesDepartment of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, United States.
Presley McGarrySchool of Criminology and Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, United States.
Catherine StevensSchool of Criminology and Justice Studies, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals in positions of power are often required to make high-stakes decisions. The approach-inhibition theory of social power holds that elevated power activates approach-related tendencies, leading to decisiveness and action orientation. However, naturalistic decision-making research has often reported that increased power often has the opposite effect and causes more avoidant decision-making. To investigate the potential activation of avoidance-related tendencies in response to elevated power, this study employed an immersive scenario-based battery of least-worst decisions (the Least-Worst Uncertain Choice Inventory for Emergency Responses; LUCIFER) with members of the United States Armed Forces. In line with previous naturalistic decision-making research on the effect of power, this research found that in conditions of higher power, individuals found decisions more difficult and were more likely to make an avoidant choice. Furthermore, this effect was more pronounced in domain-specific decisions for which the individual had experience. These findings expand our understanding of when, and in what contexts, power leads to approach vs. avoidant tendencies, as well as demonstrate the benefits of bridging methodological divides that exist between "in the lab" and "in the field" when studying high-uncertainty decision-making.

Indexed as

approach/avoidleast-worst decisionorganizational cultureredundant deliberationsocial power

Identifiers

PMID36908649
PMCPMC10000295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read7
measurements read21
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.