바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

돈과 권력이 대인간 거리에 미치는 영향

Effects of Money and Power on Interpersonal Distance

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격 / Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, (P)1229-0653;
2013, v.27 no.3, pp.47-58
https://doi.org/10.21193/kjspp.2013.27.3.003
안서원 (서울과학기술대학교)
박수애 (연세대학교)
김범준 (경기대학교)

초록

본 연구에서는 돈과 권력의 점화가 대인간 거리에 미치는 영향에 대해 알아보았다. 대인간 거리를 사회적 거리와 물리적 거리로 구분하여, 연구 1에서는 돈과 권력이 사회적 거리에 미치는 영향을 살펴보았다. 사회적 거리는 조망수용 과제를 통하여 측정하였다. 사회적 거리에 대해서는 돈과 권력 모두 사회적 거리를 멀어지게 만들 것이라고 예측하여 돈과 권력에 대해 점화를 받은 집단을 통제집단과 비교하였다. 그 결과, 예측한대로 돈과 권력이 점화된 집단이 통제집단보다 사회적 거리가 크게 나타났다. 연구 2에서는 돈과 권력이 물리적 거리에 미치는 영향을 살펴보았고 예측한대로 권력이 점화된 조건이 돈이 점화된 조건보다 물리적 거리를 적게 둠을 확인할 수 있었다. 마지막으로 돈과 권력의 공통점과 차이점을 논의하였다.

keywords
money, power, social distance, physical distance, perspective-taking, priming, 돈, 권력, 사회적 거리, 물리적 거리, 조망수용, 점화

Abstract

The present study examined the comparable and differential effects of money and power on interpersonal distance, which was divided into social or psychological distance and physical distance. In Experiment 1, the effect of money and power on social distance was examined and social distance was measured by a perspective taking task. Because similar effects of money and power were expected, the two groups, primed with money and power, were compared to a control group. As expected, both groups showed more social distance compared to the control group. In Experiment 2, the effect of money and power on physical distance was investigated. As expected, the group primed with power showed more physical closeness than the group primed with money. Finally, comparable and differential aspects of money and power were discussed.

keywords
money, power, social distance, physical distance, perspective-taking, priming, 돈, 권력, 사회적 거리, 물리적 거리, 조망수용, 점화

참고문헌

1.

김아영 (1997). 학구적 실패에 대한 내성의 관련변인 연구. 교육심리연구, 11, 1-19.

2.

서은국, 최인철 (2005). 한국판 축약형 Big 5. 미출판 원고.

3.

안서원, 박수애, 김범준 (2012). 사람들은 돈이 어떤 변화를 가져온다고 생각하는가?: 나와 타인의 차이. 한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격, 26, 45-61.

4.

Edwards, C. P., 하영희 (2005). 부모와 형제에 대한 초기청소년의 친사회적 행동에 영향을 미치는 부모애착, 사회경제적 지위 및 조망수용. 한국심리학회지: 사회문제, 11, 43-57.

5.

Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 673-704.

6.

Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: industrial, military, and educational impact. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

7.

Bengtsson, H., & Johnson, L. (1992). Perspective- taking, empathy, and prosocial behavior in late childhood. Child Study Journal, 22, 11-22.

8.

Boeker, W. (1992). Power and managerial dismissal: Scapegoating at the top. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 400-421.

9.

Bogardus, E. S. (1927). Leadership and social distance. Sociology and Social Research, 12, 173-178.

10.

Davis, M. H., Conklin, L., Smith, A., & Luce, C. (1996). Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: A merging of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 713-726.

11.

Dean, L. M., Willis, F. N., & Hewitt, J. (1975). Initial interaction distance among individuals equal and unequal in military rank. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 294-299.

12.

French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp.118-149). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute of Social Research.

13.

Furnham, A. (1984). Many sides of the coin: The psychology of money usage. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 501-509.

14.

Gabrielidis, C., Stephan, W., Ybarra, O., Pearson, V., & Villareal, L. (1997). Preferred styles of conflict resolution: Mexico and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 661-677.

15.

Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 453-466.

16.

Galinsky, A. D., Ku, G., & Want, C. S. (2005). Perspective taking and self-other overlap: Fostering social bonds and facilitating social coordination. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8, 109-124.

17.

Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17, 1068-1074.

18.

Gino, F., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012). Vicarious dishonesty: When psychological closeness creates distance from one's moral compass. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119, 15-26.

19.

Heslin, R., & Boss, D. (1980). Nonverbal intimacy in airport arrival and departure. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 248-252.

20.

Kerr, S., & Jermier, J. M. (1978). Substitutes for leadership: their meaning and measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 22, 375-403.

21.

Hass, R. G. (1984). Perspective taking and self-awareness: Drawing an E on your forehead. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 788-798.

22.

Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Cultures consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

23.

Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265-284.

24.

Lammers, J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009). The conceptualization of power and the nature of interdependency: The role of legitimacy and culture. In D. Tjosvold & B. van Knipppenberg (Eds.), Power and interdependence in organizations (pp.67-82). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Lammers, J., Stoker, J. I., & Stapel, D. A. (2009). Differentiating Social and Personal Power: Opposite effects on stereotyping, but parallel effects on behavioral approach tendencies. Psychological Science, 20, 1543-1549.

26.

Lammers, J., Galinsky, A. D., Gordijn, E. H., & Otten, S. (2012). Power increases social distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 282-290.

27.

Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343-356.

28.

Latané, B., Liu, J. H., Nowak, A., Bonevento, M., & Zheng, L. (1995). Distance matters: Physical space and social impact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 795-805.

29.

Lee, F., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2001). Is it lonely at the top?: The independence and interdependence of power holders. Research in Organizational Behavior, 23, 43-91.

30.

Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the “field at a given time.” In E. R. Hilgard & D. G. Marquis (Eds.), Conditioning and learning. New York: Appleton-Century.

31.

Lincoln, J., & Miller, J. (1979). Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relational networks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 181-199.

32.

Mitchell, T. R., Dakin, S., Mickel, A., & Gray, S. (1998). The measurement of money importance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, San Diego.

33.

Singelis, T. M. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591.

34.

Singelis, T., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D., & Gelfand, M. (1995). Horizontal and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research, 29, 240-275.

35.

Small, D. A. (2010). Sympathy biases and sympathy appeals: Reducing social distance to boost charitable contributions. In D. M. Oppenheimer & C. Y. Olivola (Eds..), The science of giving: Experimental approaches to the study of charity (pp. 149-160). New York: Taylor and Francis.

36.

Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York: Plenum Press.

37.

Tang, T. L. P. (1992). The meaning of money revisited. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 197-202.

38.

Unsworth, S. J., Sears, C. R., & Pexman, P. M. (2005). Cultural influences on categorization processes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 662-688

39.

Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2006). The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154-1156.

40.

Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L., & Goode, M. R. (2008). Merely activating the concept of money changes personal and interpersonal behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 208-212.

41.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.

한국심리학회지: 사회 및 성격