The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Explaining the nature of power: a three-process theory
Open accessAbstract
Power is an inescapable feature of human social life and structure. This paper addresses the nature of power. The standard theory is that power is the capacity for influence and that influence is based on the control of resources valued or desired by others. However, there have always been problems with this theory and new ones have appeared. The paper summarizes the standard theory and its problems, outlines the different meanings of power and presents a new theory emphasizing group identity, social organization and ideology rather than dependence as the basis of power. It proposes that power is based on persuasion, authority and coercion. A key point is that the theory changes the way these processes have been understood by reversing the causal sequence of the standard theory. The latter argues that control of resources produces power, power is the basis of influence and that mutual influence leads to the formation of a psychological group. The three-process theory argues that psychological group formation produces influence, that influence is the basis of power and that power leads to the control of resources. Implications of the theory for social change, coercion, prejudice and the extent to which power is a social evil are briefly noted. The challenge is to study how power emerges from and functions within social relationships with a definite social, ideological and historical content rather than reifying it as an abstract external force producing generic psychological effects. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A theory of social comparison processes
Festinger, L. (1954) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675400700202 · Cited by 20,926
A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0046408 · Cited by 4,819
Power, approach, and inhibition.
Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.110.2.265 · Cited by 3,427
Group polarization as conformity to the prototypical group member
McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., David, B., & Wetherell, M. S. (1992) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1992.tb00952.x · Cited by 140
Self-citation
Cited by
Social Identity Theory and Self‐categorization Theory: A Historical Review
Hornsey, M. J. (2008) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00066.x · Cited by 1,586
A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an Intervention Mapping approach
Kok, G., Gottlieb, N. H., Peters, G.-J. Y., Mullen, P. D., Parcel, G. S., Ruiter, R. A. C., Fernández, M. E., Markham, C., & Bartholomew, L. K. (2016) · Health Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/17437199.2015.1077155 · Cited by 1,137
Nguyen, H.-H. D., & Ryan, A. M. (2008) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0012702 · Cited by 913
Reicher, S., Haslam, S. A., & Hopkins, N. (2005) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.007 · Cited by 640
Stressing the group: Social identity and the unfolding dynamics of responses to stress.
Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. (2006) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1037 · Cited by 502
Metadata
- Authors
- Turner, J. C.
- Venue
- European Journal of Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-22
- ISSN
- 0046-2772 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0992
- OpenAlex
- W2153749324
- Cited by
- 607
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 79.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.