ArticleThe British journal of social psychology2026
Redefining power in social psychology.
Article in The British journal of social psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Redefining power in social psychology.The British journal of social psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This article synthesizes cutting-edge research from our special issue examining power across groups, communities and nations to advance a fundamental reconceptualization that reveals power's inherent plurality, dynamism and cultural embeddedness. Drawing on evidence from a diverse set of countries and innovative methodologies, we demonstrate that traditional definitions of power as asymmetric resource control fail to capture its real-world complexity. The collected research reveals three critical insights. First, power operates through multiple, intersecting mechanisms-from ideological frameworks like hegemonic masculinity to seemingly benevolent helping behaviours that maintain hierarchies. Second, power's meaning and operation vary dramatically across cultural contexts, with the power-status relationship ranging from nearly synonymous in some societies to entirely disconnected in others. Third, marginalized groups develop sophisticated alternative conceptualizations of power as collective resistance, cultural preservation and mutual aid that enable transformation despite structural disadvantages. These findings necessitate theoretical frameworks that accommodate power's plurality while identifying general principles, examining dynamic processes rather than static attributes and integrating multiple levels of analysis. We argue for moving beyond imposed definitions to understand how diverse groups conceptualize their own agency, examining not just domination but resistance and developing interventions that promote more equitable power distributions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.