Impression Management Tactics and Group Influence

Deze scriptie is afkomstig van: http://www.studentenonderzoek.com & http://www.studiosus.
nl, Online Scripties & Verslagen
Impression Management in Group Situations: ffects of Self! "resentations on the #ormation of "ositive Impressions and Influence in "ro$ect %eams
Final thesis Sjir Uitdewilligen I099716 Maastricht University Fac lty !" #c!n!$ics and % siness &d$inistrati!n & g st '00( S pervis!r) Sara Sa"ay
*1*
*'*
&'stract
+his thesis investigates the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent !n the "!r$ati!n !" p!sitive i$pressi!ns and in"l ence in pr!ject tea$s, It d!es this -y giving an !verview !" the literat re !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent and a research !n the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in gr! p sit ati!ns, I$pressi!n $anage$ent the!ry has received increasing levels !" attenti!n -y !rgani.ati!nal sch!lars in the last '( years, /!wever0 $!st researchers in this area have st died it as an is!lated dyadic interacti!n1 n!t ta2ing int! acc! nt that $!st i$pressi!n $anage$ent per"!r$ances are given t! $!re than !ne pers!n at a ti$e, +his thesis adds t! the e3isting literat re -y st dying i$pressi!n $anage$ent in a gr! p sit ati!n, It was hyp!thesised that the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics is p!sitively related t! li2ing and perceived c!$petence and that these p!sitive i$pressi!ns in t rn are p!sitively related t! in"l ence in pr!ject gr! ps, +he res lts s pp!rted the relati!n -etween the p!sitive i$pressi!ns and in"l ence, /!wever0 the relati!n -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and p!sitive i$pressi!ns was !nly partially s pp!rted, 4!ntrary t! ! tc!$es !" s!$e researches !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent in dyadic interacti!ns0 it t rned ! t that sel"*pr!$!ti!n is a $!re e""ective tactic !n a gr! p level than ingratiati!n, Keywords: I$pressi!n $anage$ent1 Sel"*presentati!n1 Ingratiati!n1 Sel"*pr!$!ti!n1 5r!ject tea$s1 In"l ence
*6*
(ontents &'stract................................................................................................................) *. Introduction.....................................................................................................* +. %heoretical 'ackground.................................................................................., ). Influence in groups........................................................................................),. ./potheses.....................................................................................................,* -. Methods..........................................................................................................,0 1. 2esults.............................................................................................................-) %a'le 1.* ...........................................................................................................-) "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the 3nowledge ngineering sample...........................................................................................-) %a'le 1.+ ...........................................................................................................-, "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the .ogeschool 4u/d sample.......................................................................................................-, %a'le 1.) ............................................................................................................-, "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the $oined sample .............................................................................................................................-, Independent sample t!tests are run on the dependent and independent varia'les in the two different groups to search for differences in ratings of self!monitoring, impression management 'ehaviour, and group mem'er ratings. %he independent sample t!tests 5ta'le 1.,6 onl/ show significant differences 'etween the two samples on the varia'les 78iking9 and 7Influence9. %he means of these varia'les indicate that on average, the students at the .ogeschool 4u/d rated their co!workers higher on these varia'les than the students of 3nowledge ngineering. ...............................-%a'le 1., ............................................................................................................-Independent sample t!test results on the two samples...................................-%a'le 1.-.............................................................................................................-1 *!tailed partial correlations for the $oined sample with 7Sample9 as a control varia'le..................................................................................................-1 %a'le 1.1.............................................................................................................-: 2egressions to test for the moderating effect of self!monitoring in the relation 'etween ingratiation and liking.........................................................-: %a'le 1.;.............................................................................................................1< 2egressions to test for the moderating effect of self!monitoring in the relation 'etween self!promotion and perceived competence.........................1< %a'le 1.0.............................................................................................................1+ 2egressions to test for the mediating effect of liking in the relation 'etween ingratiation and influence.................................................................................1+ %a'le 1.:.............................................................................................................1) 2egressions to test for the mediating effect of perceived competence in the relation 'etween self!promotion and influence...............................................1)
*7*
%a'le 1.*<...........................................................................................................1, 2egression anal/sis of the dependent varia'le influence against the control varia'les, impressions, and impression management tactics. ..........1, Model 1.* ...........................................................................................................12elations 'etween the varia'les as tested '/ the h/potheses........................1;. Discussion and limitations............................................................................11 0. (onclusion......................................................................................................;, :. 2eferences......................................................................................................;1 *<. &ppendi=......................................................................................................0,
*(*
I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns
4hapter 1, Intr!d cti!n
*. Introduction
4!ncerns with i$pressi!n $anage$ent already g! -ac2 t! the ti$e !" the ancient 8ree2s, In the "i"th cent ry %,4, the rhet!ric pr!"ess!rs0 na$ed S!phists0 !pened p sch!!ls in which they ed cated y! ng $en t! $a2e a g!!d i$pressi!n in the y! ng de$!cracy, 5lat! 9:!!lschijn0 1996; str!ngly disagreed with these practices, &cc!rding t! hi$0 pe!ple sh! ld -e c!nvinced -y the real c!ntent !" a $essage and n!t -y the style in which it was -r! ght, /e drew a distincti!n -etween pe!ple with real and pe!ple with perceived c!$petence, +he "irst are th!se wh! c!nvince !thers !" their !wn w!rth and gain in"l ence -y displaying their real s2ills and 2n!wledge, +he latter are th!se wh! attain these g!als0 n!t -eca se !" their !wn $erit - t -eca se they 2n!w h!w t! play "!r and c!nvince an a dience, 5lat! saw this 2ind !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent as e3tre$ely detesta-le -ehavi! r and str!ngly c!nvicted the rhet!ric pr!"ess!rs wh! ta ght the s2ills t! engage in these tactics, +he s!ci!l!gist 8!""$an 919(9; was the "irst t! l!!2 at i$pressi!n $anage$ent as an !-jective "ield !" st dy, /e de"ined the c!ncept !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent as the idea that pe!ple c!nsci! sly $anage the i$pressi!ns they c!nvey t! !thers in interpers!nal interacti!ns, /e pr!p!sed a dra$at rgical perspective !" s!cial interacti!ns in which pe!ple are seen as act!rs wh! engage in per"!r$ances in vari! s settings0 -e"!re an a dience0 t! "!r$ a de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n, Fr!$ the s!ci!l!gists and s!cial psych!l!gist0 the s -ject ca$e nder the attenti!n !" sch!lars in !rgani.ati!nal -ehavi! r, In c!nte$p!rary !rgani.ati!ns0 i$pressi!ns play an i$p!rtant r!le, F!r e3a$ple) applicants try t! $a2e a g!!d "irst i$pressi!n at a j!- interview0 sales$en $ st $a2e a tr sta-le i$pressi!n t! sell their pr!d cts0 $anagers $ st l!!2 li2e they are in c!ntr!l0 -! ndary spanning pers!nnel $ st represent their c!$pany0 and c!ns ltants are str!ngly c!ncerned with an i$age !" rati!nalis$ and pr!"essi!nalis$, +he i$p!rtance !" i$pressi!ns "!r di""erent pe!ple in an !rgani.ati!n0 draws attenti!n t! the $anagea-ility !" these i$pressi!ns, +! what e3tent and with what tactics are pe!ple a-le t! shape the i$ages !ther pe!ple have !" the$< Several researchers 9=!nes & 5itt$an0 19>'1 ?ayne & Ferris0 1990; identi"ied i$p!rtant tactics !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent and de$!nstrated that the se !" these tactics can -e -ene"icial t! the act!r in a wide variety !" sit ati!ns 9Stevens & :rist!"0 199(1 ?ayne & Ferris0 19901 ?ayne & @iden0 199(1 /iggins0 = dge0 & Ferris0 '006; /!wever0 $!st !" these st dies investigated i$pressi!n $anage$ent directed at s!$e!ne higher in hierarchy0 s! called pward i$pressi!n $anage$ent, Aesearch a-! t the e""ects !"
*1*
d!wnward i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 directed at a s -!rdinate !r lateral i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 directed at peers0 is still scarce, M!re!ver0 the se and e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent have $ainly -een st died at a dyadic level0 alth! gh in $!st !rgani.ati!nal sit ati!ns0 sel"*presentati!ns are n!t given in is!lated !ne*t!*!ne interacti!ns - t !"ten t! di""erent pe!ple at the sa$e ti$e, &s the se !" w!r2 gr! ps and tea$s has -ec!$e $!re and $!re i$p!rtant in !rgani.ati!ns 94!hen & %ailey0 1997;0 it is i$p!rtant t! c!nsider the se and e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in gr! p sit ati!ns, +his research there"!re l!!2s at the di""erent "act!rs that play a r!le in sel"*presentati!ns given "!r a gr! p !" pe!ple c!$pared t! sel"*presentati!ns in a dyadic sit ati!n and it will l!!2 at the ! tc!$es !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics in pr!ject tea$s, &s a $eas re !" an interpers!nal ! tc!$e !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in a gr! p0 this research l!!2s at the in"l ence a gr! p $e$-er has !n gr! p decisi!ns, In"l ence is a real gr! p level $eas re that is n!t !nly the aggregate !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent e""ects !n the individ al $e$-ers in the gr! p, &cc!rding t! s!$e the!rists in"l ence is the -asic p rp!se !" sel"* presentati!ns 9=!nes & 5itt$an0 19>'1 8angestad & Snyder0 '000;, I$pressi!n $anage$ent is e3pected t! have an i$pact !n in"l ence in tw! ways, First !" all0 it is e3pected t! have an i$pact !n the str ct ral aspects !" in"l ence, &cc!rding t! e3pectati!n states the!ry 9%erger0 Fise20 B!r$an0 & Celditch0 1977;0 the stat s !" a gr! p $e$-er is e3pected t! -e p!sitively related with the e3pectati!ns the !ther gr! p $e$-ers have a-! t the a-ilities !" that pers!n t! c!ntri- te t! the gr! p g!als, Stat s characteristics are sed as cl es "!r "!r$ing these per"!r$ance e3pectati!ns, %y $eans !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 an act!r is e3pected t! in"l ence the stat s cl es he* gives !" t! his c!*w!r2ers and there-y he can a""ect his level !" in"l ence, Sec!ndly0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent is e3pected t! " ncti!n as -ehavi! r that is directly related t! in"l ence, Aesearchers !n interpers!nal in"l ence have identi"ied -ehavi! ral tactics that lead t! in"l ence and s!$e !" these tactics sh!w str!ng si$ilarities with i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics 9:ipnis0 Sch$idt0 & ?il2ins!n0 19>01 D 2l & Fal-e0 19901 Schrieshei$ & /in2in0 1990;, +here"!re0 in this research it is investigated i" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics a""ect the a$! nt !" in"l ence a gr! p $e$-er has in a gr! p, +! investigate the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in a gr! p0 tw! sa$ples are sed0 c!nsisting ! t !" st dents w!r2ing t!gether in pr!ject tea$s, &t the end !" the pr!ject0 st dents were as2ed t! "ill in E esti!nnaires a-! t their !wn i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 a-! t the i$pressi!ns they had !" their gr! p $e$-ers0 and a-! t the a$! nt !"
1
I" FheG is sed in this article t! re"er t! an act!r0 it $ay re"er t! a $ale as well as t! a "e$ale pers!n,
*'*
in"l ence their gr! p $e$-ers had in gr! p decisi!ns, It is e3pected that higher levels !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics are related with higher levels !" p!sitive i$pressi!ns and c!nseE ently with $!re in"l ence,
*6*
4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd
+. %heoretical 'ackground
+.* .istorical 'ackground of impression management %e"!re the 1970s i$pressi!n $anage$ent in !rgani.ati!ns was $ainly researched as a part !" !rgani.ati!nal p!litics, +he research d!ne was sp!radic and with! t an integrated the!retical "ra$ew!r2, /!wever0 the $!re p!p lar $anage$ent -!!2s had already rec!gni.ed the i$p!rtance !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent "!r !rgani.ati!nal s ccess 9A!sen"eld0 8iacal!ne0 & Ai!rdan0 199(;, In the 19>0s $!re scienti"ic st dies applying the i$pressi!n $anage$ent c!ncept t! !rgani.ati!nal settings appeared 9:ipnis0 Sch$idt0 & ?il2ins!n0 19>01 5"e""er0 19>11 8iacal!ne and A!sen"eld0 19>61 8ardner and Martin2!0 19>>;, %y then0 the "! ndati!n !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent the!ry was already "ir$ly esta-lished -y s!ci!l!gists and s!cial psych!l!gists, +he area has -een devel!ping since its "! nding in 19(9 98!""$an0 19(91 @eary0 199(; and several the!rists have c!ntri- ted t! its devel!p$ent, +he s!ci!l!gist #rving 8!""$an is !"ten descri-ed as the "! nder !" the the!ry !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent, In his -!!2 F+he presentati!n !" sel" in everyday li"eG 919(9; he ses the $etaph!r !" theatrical per"!r$ance t! ill strate h!w pe!ple $anage the i$pressi!ns they c!$$ nicate t! !thers in everyday li"e, /e sees i$pressi!n $anage$ent as essential "!r the " ncti!ning !" s!cial interacti!n, ?hen individ als $eet0 they will try t! acE ire in"!r$ati!n a-! t each !ther s! that they will 2n!w what t! e3pect !" the !ther and what will -e e3pected !" the$, ?ith this in"!r$ati!n they will "!r$ a de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n which reg lates their c!nd ct and their treat$ent !" each !ther, %y $anaging the i$pressi!ns that are given !"" t! !thers0 a pers!n can in"l ence their de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n and there-y in"l ence h!w they will -e treated -y th!se !thers, & pers!n in a s!cial interacti!n is there"!re seen as an act!r wh! gives a per"!r$ance t! an a dience in a certain setting t! "!r$ a de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n, 8!""$an devel!ped his the!ry in line with the view !" sy$-!lic interacti!nis$, Sy$-!lic interacti!nists see the individ al and s!ciety as insepara-le and interdependent nits, +he relati!nship -etween the individ al and s!ciety is $ediated -y sy$-!ls0 which are $ental representati!ns !" !-jects and events that have an agreed* p!n c!llective $eaning in a s!ciety, &cc!rding t! this the!ry0 ! r c!ncept !" sel" devel!ps thr! gh s!cial interacti!n -etween the individ al and s!ciety 9Schlen2er0 19>0;, F!r e3a$ple0 a p!lice ni"!r$ sy$-!li.es that a pers!n wearing it0 h!lds a certain " ncti!n in s!ciety, +he sel"*c!ncept !"
*7*
the p!lice !""icer depends !n the sy$-!ls he gives !"" and the $eaning these sy$-!ls have in that s!ciety, +hese sy$-!ls give cl es t! the a dience a-! t h!w a sit ati!n sh! ld -e de"ined, /ence0 the a dience 2n!ws it sh! ld treat the pers!n wearing the ni"!r$ acc!rding t! the way they sh! ld treat a p!lice !""icer, +he sy$-!ls a pers!n gives !"" $ay di""er depending !n the sit ati!n and the a dience, 8!""$an -!rr!ws "r!$ ?illia$ =a$es 91>90; the c!ncept !" $ ltiple selves, =a$es states that a pers!n has Fas $any di""erent s!cial selves as there are distinct gr! ps !" pers!ns a-! t wh!se !pini!n he caresG 9=a$es0 1>900 pp, '97;, In !ne sit ati!n the p!lice !""icer $ight wear his ni"!r$ and act a th!ritatively when acting ! t his j!-0 while in an!ther sit ati!n he $ight wear leis re cl!thes and -ehave hi$sel" nice and "riendly when he is at h!$e with his wi"e and 2ids, Script the!ry0 devel!ped -y &-els!n 919>1;0 is a the!ry !" s!cial c!gniti!n that states that pe!ple "!r$ c!gnitive scripts thr! gh e3periences with sit ati!ns, +hese c!gnitive scripts are a c!herent seE ence !" events e3pected -y a pers!n t! happen in a sit ati!n in which the pers!n is !r is n!t e3pected t! act hi$sel", S ch a script is c!$para-le t! a script "!r a scene in a $!vie, F!r e3a$ple0 when a pers!n enters a r!!$0 he is e3pected t! greet the pe!ple inside the r!!$ and the pe!ple inside are e3pected t! great hi$ -ac2, In s ch a sit ati!n a pers!n selects an appr!priate script and ta2es a r!le t! play within that script, Script the!ry adds t! i$pressi!n $anage$ent the!ry -y giving an e3planati!n !" h!w i$pressi!ns can in"l ence -ehavi! r, +he way a sit ati!n is de"ined and the r!le a pers!n ta2es within the script depend in part !n the i$pressi!ns he has !" the !ther act!rs and the i$pressi!ns he gives !"" hi$sel", &t a-! t the sa$e ti$e as 8!""$anGs devel!p$ent !" the dra$at rgical appr!ach0 #dward =!nes started his investigati!n int! ingratiati!n, /e de"ined ingratiati!n as Fth!se epis!des !" s!cial -ehavi! r that are designed t! increase the attractiveness !" the act!r t! the targetG 9=!nes0 19670 pp,';, S! it dealt with a $!re li$ited part !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 speci"ically "!c sed at increasing attractiveness, In s -seE ent the!ry ingratiati!n was ad!pted as !ne !" the -asic tactics !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent 9=!nes & 5itt$an0 19>';,
+.+ Deceptive activit/ or e=pression of the true self> It has -een reas!ned -y s!$e the!rists that -y $anaging and adapting the i$pressi!ns they give !""0 pe!ple hide their tr e selves and act in a deceptive way, +he $!tivati!n t! engage in *(*
this -ehavi! r w! ld -e t! deceive and $anip late !thers in !rder t! acE ire pers!nal gain, &r2in and Shepperd 919>9;0 "!r e3a$ple0 $a2e a distincti!n -etween style and s -stance, S -stance is seen as the FrealG c!ntent !" a $essage and style is the way the $essage is pac2aged and delivered t! the a dience, +hey state that the $!re we 2n!w a-! t h!w p!wer" l pe!ple !rchestrate cr cial events and acc! nt "!r their res lts0 the -etter we will -e a-le t! prevent style "r!$ inter"ering with s -stance, Feld$an0 F!rrest0 and /app 9'00'; "! nd in an e3peri$ent that s -jects instr cted t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r were $!re li2ely t! lie than pe!ple in a c!ntr!l c!nditi!n, =!nes 91967; calls ingratiati!n illicit -ehavi! r -eca se it is directed t!wards !-jectives that are n!t c!ntained in the i$plicit c!ntract which nderlies s!cial interacti!n, /e sees the ingratiat!r as hiding his tr e $!tives and presenting hi$sel" as attractive t! the target in !rder t! reap s!$e " t re -ene"its, Schlen2er and ?eig!ld 9199'; na$ed the view0 in which i$pressi!n $anage$ent is seen as a 2ind !" deceptive -ehavi! r sed -y !nly a certain 2ind !" pe!ple t! reach s!$e interpers!nal g!als0 the restrictive view, +hey !pp!sed it against the e3pansive view0 which sees i$pressi!n $anage$ent as a -iE it! s "eat re !" s!cial -ehavi! r, &lth! gh 8!""$an 919(9; p!ints t! the "act that the !riginal @atin $eaning !" the w!rd Fpers!nG is a $as20 he sees i$pressi!n $anage$ent as a necessary ele$ent "!r s$!!th s!cial interacti!n, It $a2es clear what we can e3pect !" !thers and what !thers can e3pect !" s, /e als! $enti!ns that s!$eti$es c!nsci! s e""!rt is needed in !rder t! ens re that the i$pressi!ns !thers have !" s are c!rrect, C c2er$an0 /all0 HeFran20 and A!senthal 91976; de$!nstrated that s!$eti$es0 when a pers!n deli-erately displays e3pressi!ns !" internal states which he n!t act ally e3periences0 these e3pressi!ns can -e interpreted $!re easily -y an !-server than the Fnat ralG e3pressi!n !" s ch an internal state, S!0 it can -e se" l t! engage in s!$e i$pressi!n $anage$ent i" pe!ple want !thers t! 2n!w their act al internal e3periences, It can als! happen that pe!ple get the Fwr!ngG i$pressi!n and s!$e e""!rt is needed t! set it right, S!0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent can als! -e directed at the g!al !" displaying an acc rate i$age !" !nesel", M!st c!nte$p!rary the!rists share the view that i$pressi!n $anage$ent is a n!r$al aspect !" s!cial interacti!n, Schlen2er and ?eig!ld 9199'; state that t! as2 i" i$pressi!n $anage$ent is g!ing !n in s!cial interacti!n0 is the sa$e as as2ing i" c!gniti!n is g!ing !n in s!cial interacti!n1 n! c!ntent !" a $essage can ever -e delivered with! t a certain "!r$ !" pac2aging "!r that $essage, In $!st sit ati!ns pe!ple cann!t g! a-! t displaying all the i$pressi!ns they w! ld li2e t! display, +he range !" i$pressi!ns they can display is li$ited -y a n $-er !" "act!rs, First !" *6*
all0 they are c!ntr!lled -y their -elieva-ility, I" sel"*presentati!ns are t!! sel"*gl!ri"icating0 this can lead t! n $er! s pr!-le$s "!r the act!r, It can lead t! e3tre$ely high e3pectati!ns0 as well as0 t! an3iety ca sed -y c!ncerns !" the a-ility t! live p t! these e3pectati!ns 9Schlen2er & ?eig!ld0 199';, @eary and :!wals2i 91990; add t! this that $!st pe!ple have internalised an ethic against lying which h!lds the$ "r!$ $a2ing t!! deceit" l clai$s and gives the$ "eelings !" g ilt i" they have d!ne s!, &n!ther draw-ac2 !" $a2ing nrealistic i$pressi!ns is that they can -ac2"ire and create the i$age !" a c!nceited pers!n !r a syc!phant 9+ rnley & %!lin!0 '001;, &ls! pe!pleGs -elie"s a-! t their !wn identities0 $!derates their sel"*presentati!ns, Schlen2er and ?eig!ld 9199'; $enti!n three e3planati!ns "!r this $!derating e""ect, First !" all0 str!ng sel"*-elie"s are $!re accessi-le in $e$!ry and $!re li2ely t! -e activated acr!ss sit ati!ns and a diences, 4!nseE ently0 pe!ple will -e $!re inclined t! -ehave in acc!rdance with their -elie"s a-! t the$selves0 -eca se this will c!st less c!nsci! s c!gnitive activity than creating nrealistic i$ages a-! t the$selves, Sec!ndly0 pe!ple s ally have a E ite high regard !" their !wn attri- tes relative t! th!se !" !thers, %eca se pe!ple tend t! !veresti$ate the val e !" their !wn attri- tes0 they $ight -e $!re inclined t! se the$ t! create a g!!d i$pressi!n !n !thers, Finally0 pe!ple wh! lac2 certain E alities s ally d! -t their a-ility t! ph!ld the clai$ that they have these E alities, In sh!rt0 alth! gh s!$e i$pressi!n $anage$ent $ay -e deceptive0 certainly n!t all i$pressi!n $anage$ent is, 5e!ple !"ten display i$ages !" the$selves representing their $!st "av! ra-le E alities - t these i$ages are 2ept in chec2 -y their -elieva-ility and -y the sel"* -elie"s and the identity !" the act!r, 5e!ple can there"!re $!re !"ten -e e3pected t! edit their e3pressive -ehavi! r0 de*e$phasising negative E alities and e$phasising p!sitive E alities0 than t! "a-ricate c!$pletely nrealistic i$pressi!ns 9Schlen2er & ?eig!ld0 199';,
+.) Definition and scope of impression management I$pressi!n $anage$ent is de"ined in the literat re as) the pr!cess -y which individ als atte$pt t! c!ntr!l the i$pressi!ns !thers "!r$ !" the$ 9@eary & :!wals2i0 19901 A!sen"eld0 8iacal!ne0 & Ai!rdan0 199(;, Schlen2er 919>0; disting ishes it "r!$ sel"*presentati!n -y stating that sel"*presentati!n deals with i$pressi!ns a-! t the act!r hi$sel"0 while i$pressi!n $anage$ent can als! -e ai$ed at c!ntr!lling the i$ages !" !-jects !r events that are !nly indirectly sel"*relevant, &n e3a$ple !" this w! ld -e a p -lic relati!ns e3pert representing a *7*
c!$pany, Schlen2er and %ritt 91999; "! nd evidence that st dents $anaged the i$pressi!ns !" their "riends when these "riends were c!nsidered t! -e in need "!r pr!$!ti!n !r pr!tecti!n !" their identities, /ence0 a "!r$ !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent e3ists that is n!t directly ai$ed at c!ntr!lling the i$age !" the act!r hi$sel", /!wever0 even in these cases i$pressi!n $anage$ent !"ten d!es have s!$e sel"*relevance and it can there"!re -e seen as an indirect "!r$ !" sel"*presentati!n, +he i$ages !" ! r "riends and $!re generally the things we are c!nnected with0 are als! relevant t! ! r !wn sel"*c!ncept, Schlen2er 919>0; ses the ter$ p!sitive generali.ati!n t! indicate that pe!ple wh! are lin2ed t! p!sitive identities will als! -e eval ated $!re p!sitively, Finch and 4ialdini 919>9; disc!vered a phen!$en!n0 they called -!!sting0 which re"ers t! the tendency !" an individ al t! rate a negative !ther $!re "av! ra-ly i" he is s!$eh!w c!nnected with this !ther pers!n, +his c!nnecti!n can even -e very s per"icial, +hey de$!nstrated this e""ect in an e3peri$ent in which they s pplied s -jects with negative in"!r$ati!n a-! t the A ssian $!n2 Aasp tin and t!ld s!$e s -jects that they had the sa$e -irthday as Aasp tin, Aesp!ndents wh! were t!ld that they had the sa$e -irthday as the A ssian $!n20 eval ated hi$ $!re "av! ra-ly than resp!ndents wh! had n!t -een t!ld this, S!0 the line -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent and sel"*presentati!n is as g!!d as i$p!ssi-le t! draw and there"!re these ter$s will -e sed interchangea-ly in this article, +edeschi and Aeiss 919>1; draw attenti!n t! the deli-erateness !" c!ntr!lling i$pressi!ns, &ll -ehavi! r !" individ als has the p!tential !" having e""ect !n the i$pressi!ns !thers "!r$ !" the$, +his $eans that0 in a very -r!ad way all -ehavi! r can -e seen as i$pressi!n $anage$ent, &t the !ther e3tre$e it can -e ass $ed that the act!r $ st have intended t! create the relevant i$pressi!n and is aware !" engaging in this pr!cess, +edeschi and Aeiss 919>1; arg e that "!r a -ehavi! r t! -e la-elled as i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 it sh! ld have the p rp!se !" in"l encing i$pressi!ns0 - t the act!r d!es n!t have t! -e aware !" this p rp!se, & pers!n c! ld "!r e3a$ple g! t! w!r2 wearing a "ancy - siness s it with! t reali.ing that he wears it with the p rp!se !" displaying an i$pressi!n !" c!$petence and pr!"essi!nalis$, =!nes and 5itt$an 919>'; $enti!n s!$e sit ati!ns in which i$pressi!n $anage$ent d!es n!t play a r!le, #3a$ples !" these are) p rely e3pressive -ehavi! r s ch as anger !r j!y0 r! tine transacti!ns0 !ccasi!n where pe!ple are c!ncerned with displaying their a thentic selves s ch as therapy sessi!ns0 and -ehavi! r !" high tas2*inv!lve$ent, 4si2s.ent$ihalyi 91999; de"ines the state !" "l!w as a partic lar 2ind !" enj!ya-le e3perience that pe!ple get when they engage in activities "!r which their c!$petence is j st en! gh "!r what is needed "!r that activity,
*>*
S ch an activity is s! de$anding that n! s rpl s attenti!n is le"t t! $!nit!r any sti$ li irrelevant t! the tas2, S!0 n! spare attenti!n is le"t t! dedicate t! i$pressi!n $anage$ent, M!st !" the ti$e pe!ple are nc!nsci! s !" the i$pressi!ns they $a2e !n !thers, Only when certain sti$ li are detected0 c!nsci! s attenti!n $ay shi"t t! th!se sti$ li 9@eary & :!wals2i0 1990;, ?e $ight0 "!r e3a$ple0 -e !nly $arginally aware !" ! rselves when we are engaging in an activity - t this will change drastically i" we "ind ! t that pe!ple ar! nd s are staring at s, Schlen2er 919>0; ses the c!ncepts !" !-jective and s -jective sel"*awareness t! disting ish the states in which $ ch and "ew c!nsci! s i$pressi!n $anage$ent is sed, +he the!ry !" sel"*awareness 9?ic2l nd0 19>0; states that in a state !" !-jective sel"*awareness a pers!n is the !-ject !" his !wn th! ghts, In the state !" s -jective sel"*awareness the attenti!n !" the pers!n is directed at s!$ething else, &ttenti!n can shi"t rapidly -etween these tw! states and partic larly i" s!$e!ne perceives a sy$-!l !" the sel"0 attenti!n tends t! t rn inward !nt! s!$e aspect !" the sel", S ch sy$-!ls can -e $irr!rs0 tape rec!rdings !" a pers!nGs v!ice0 !r -eing watched -y !thers, 5e!ple are $!re aware !" the i$pressi!ns they $a2e !n !thers in s ch a state !" !-jective sel"*awareness, 4!nseE ently0 the acti!ns !" pe!ple in this state are $!re !"ten the ! tc!$e !" c!nsci! s th! ght a-! t h!w !thers will perceive the$, /!wever0 even in a s -jective state !" sel"*awareness we can engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 -eca se s!$e -ehavi! r0 which was !riginally designed t! $anage i$pressi!ns0 can -ec!$e r! tine -ehavi! r that is displayed with! t the act!r even -eing aware !" it hi$sel" 9Schlen2er0 19>0;, In s $0 the level !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in which a pers!n engages0 can -e seen as a c!ntin $, On the !ne hand0 there are sit ati!ns !" e3tre$e p -lic sel"*awareness in which pe!ple attend c!nsci! sly t! all the aspects !" the$selves that !thers can !-serve, On the !ther hand0 there are sit ati!ns in which pe!ple d! n!t h!ld the$selves as the !-ject !" their !wn th! ght and c!nseE ently are n!t engaging in c!nsci! s sel"*presentati!ns 9@eary & :!wals2i0 1990;,
+., %he motivation to manage impressions +he "act that the level !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in which pe!ple engage varies0 draws attenti!n t! the $!tives a pers!n can have t! engage in this -ehavi! r, In 8!""$anGs view 919(9;0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent is seen as e3ternally ca sed -ehavi! r0 res lting "r!$ the s!cial syste$ the act!r is a part !", In this view0 act!rs internalised the n!r$s !" the syste$ *9*
and resp!nd t! the de$ands !" !thers, +his view0 h!wever0 gives n! speci"ic reas!n why pe!ple w! ld internally -e $!tivated t! engage in this -ehavi! r 9Schneider0 19>1;, S -seE ent the!rists have pr!p!sed several reas!ns "!r this $!tivati!n, @eary and :!wals2i 91990; identi"ied three interrelated - t distinct g!als !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent, First !" all0 pe!ple want t! $a3i$i.e their reward*c!st rati! in s!cial relati!ns, Sel"*presentati!n can increase the pr!-a-ility !" reaching desired ! tc!$es, +hese can -e $aterial ! tc!$es0 li2e "!r e3a$ple0 -eing accepted "!r a j!- interview, +hey can als! -e interpers!nal0 li2e gaining appr!val !r "riendship, +he $!tivati!n t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent will depend !n the val e the g!al has "!r the pers!n and the relevance !" the i$pressi!ns "!r reaching that g!al, +his relevance will depend !n the dependency !" the individ al !n the target, =!nes 91967; arg es that0 the $!re "av! ra-le ! tc!$es a pers!n can -est!w !n an individ al0 the $!re ingratiat!ry tactics the individ al will display t!wards this pers!n, +his can lead t! the sel"*presenterGs dile$$a) the $!re i$p!rtant it is "!r an individ al t! i$press a target0 the $!re li2ely the target is t! -e sceptical !" the tr th" lness !" the individ alGs sel"*presentati!ns 9@eary0 199(;, 4!nseE ently0 the $!re di""ic lt it is t! display -elieva-le sel"*presentati!ns, +he sec!nd g!al @eary and :!wals2i 91990; $enti!n is enhancing !neGs sel"*estee$, In $!st the!ries !" s!cial -ehavi! r it is accepted that pe!ple !"ten act t! rest!re and $a3i$i.e their sel"*estee$ 9Swann0 1996;, Sel"*estee$ partly depends !n -eing regarded "av! ra-ly -y signi"icant !thers, 5e!ple p t e""!rt in enhancing and s pp!rting their sel"*i$ages -y see2ing veri"icati!n "!r these enhanced i$ages "r!$ !thers 9Sedi2ides0 1996;, S!0 e3pressing a p!sitive view !" !nesel" indirectly enhances sel"*estee$ 9Schlen2er & ?eig!ld0 199';, +he third g!al is "acilitating the devel!p$ent !" desired identities, &cc!rding t! sy$-!lic interacti!nists0 ! r identity and c!nseE ently ! r c!ncept !" sel" devel!ps thr! gh interacti!n with s!ciety, Stry2er 919>0; arg es0 in line with the c!ncept !" $ ltiple selves "r!$ ?illia$ =a$es 91>90; that a pers!n h!lds several identities, S!$e !" these identities are $!re i$p!rtant "!r the sel"*c!ncept !" the pers!n than !thers, +here"!re0 the $!re i$p!rtant an identity is "!r a pers!n0 the higher the $!tivati!n t! act in ter$s !" that identity in a certain sit ati!n and t! create sit ati!ns that are c!nsistent with that identity, Mar2 s and B ri s 919>6; sed the c!ncept !" Fp!ssi-le selvesG as the i$ages individ als have !" what they li2e t! -ec!$e and what they are a"raid !" -ec!$ing, +hese i$ages $!tivate a pers!n t! act in s ch a way as t! $a2e the desired identity p!ssi-le, F!r e3a$ple0 a $anage$ent st dent0 wh! desires -ec!$ing a sel"*c!n"ident p!wer" l - siness$an0 will try t! display i$ages that are in line with this desired identity and av!id -ehavi! r that is n!t c!$pati-le with it, * 10 *
S!0 there are several p!ssi-le $!tives "!r pe!ple t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent, +he tendency !" a pers!n t! engage in sel"*presentati!ns will pr!-a-ly als! -e in"l enced -y pers!nality "act!rs, +he pers!nality c!nstr ct !" Machiavellianis$ devel!ped -y 4hristie and 8eis 91970; di""erentiates -etween pe!ple with a high and pe!ple with a l!w need "!r p!wer, /igh and l!w sc!res !n this scale represent tw! alternative strategies "!r s!cial c!nd ct, +he high sc!rer !n the scale represents an e3pl!itative s!cial strategy while the l!w sc!rer represents a s!cial strategy -ased !n recipr!city and c!!perati!n, +he high sc!rer can there"!re -e e3pected t! se $!re strategic i$pressi!n $anage$ent in !rder t! gain $!re "r!$ interpers!nal interacti!ns, +he pers!nality scale !" sel"*$!nit!ring see$s t! -e directly related t! i$pressi!n $anage$ent1 pe!ple sc!ring high !n this scale have a tendency t! engage $!re in sel"*presentati!ns than pe!ple sc!ring l!w !n this scale 9Snyder0 19771 Snyder & 8angestad0 19>6;, :rist!""*%r!wn0 %arric20 and Fran2e 9'00'; "! nd that e3traverted j!-* applicants $ade greater se !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n in j!-*interviews and applicantsG agreea-leness was c!rrelated with n!n*ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent, F rther$!re0 several !ther pers!nality "act!rs0 li2e s!cial an3iety and need "!r appr!val0 are als! e3pected have an in"l ence !n the $!tivati!n t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent 98ardner & Martin2!0 19>>;, +! s $$ari.e) a c!$-inati!n !" sit ati!nal "act!rs and pers!nality "act!rs will in"l ence the $!tivati!n !" a pers!n t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent in a partic lar sit ati!n,
+.- Impression construction @eary and :!wals2i 91990; di""erentiated i$pressi!n c!nstr cti!n "r!$ i$pressi!n $!tivati!n, I$pressi!n $!tivati!n is ass!ciated with the desire t! create partic lar i$pressi!ns in !thers0 while i$pressi!n c!nstr cti!n is the pr!cess !" selecting an i$age t! create0 and deciding h!w t! g! a-! t d!ing s!, +he c!ncepts !" $!tivati!n and c!nstr cti!n are inter$ingled, +he sel"*c!ncept and desired and ndesired identities are "act!rs that in"l ence i$pressi!n $!tivati!n - t they als! set li$itati!ns and c!nstit te a "ra$ew!r2 "!r i$pressi!n c!nstr cti!n, Other "act!rs in"l encing i$pressi!n c!nstr cti!n are r!le c!nstraints and the targetGs val es, A!les are e3pected patterns !" -ehavi! r !riginating "r!$ !cc pying a certain p!siti!n in a s!cial nit 9Schlen2er0 19>0;, & distincti!n can -e $ade -etween "!r$al r!les and i$plicit r!les 9/are0 1997;, &n e3a$ple !" a "!r$al r!le w! ld -e a p!lice !""icer wh!0 -y the * 11 *
descripti!n !" his " ncti!n0 is !-liged t! act rep ta-le, &n e3a$ple !" an i$plicit r!le is a pers!n in a gr! p wh! is e3pected -y the !thers t! $a2e i$p!rtant decisi!ns - t is n!t "!r$ally app!inted as the leader !" the gr! p, I" s!$e-!dy identi"ies !r wants t! identi"y hi$sel" with a certain r!le he can display i$ages that are c!ngr ent with that r!le in !rder t! $a2e !thers -elie" that the r!le -el!ngs t! his identity, A!les can restrict the -ehavi! r a pers!n is a-le t! display when r!le inc!ngr ent -ehavi! r is har$" l "!r enacting that r!le, F!r e3a$ple0 %ill 4lint!n g!t int! r!le tr! -le when the p -licity a-! t his e3tra$arital a""aire was inc!nsistent with his $!del*" ncti!n !" a g!!d "a$ily $e$-er0 which is e3pected "r!$ an &$erican president, +he targetGs val es c!$prise an!ther "act!r that shape the i$ages a pers!n will display, & speci"ic tactic !" ingratiati!n is displaying val es that are c!nsistent with the targetGs val es 9=!nes0 1967;, &cc!rding t! the si$ilarity*attracti!n hyp!thesis 9%yrne0 1971;0 attracti!n and li2ing -etween pe!ple is p!sitively c!rrelated with si$ilarity !" the val es !" th!se pe!ple, /ence0 displaying si$ilar val es t! the target pers!n is a direct way !" increasing attractiveness t! that pers!n, It can als! -e e3pected that the i$ages an act!r displays will -e c!nsistent with the val es !" an a dience i" the !pini!n !" that a dience $atters t! the act!r 9@eary0 199(;, S!$e val es are ass $ed !nly -y speci"ic targets while !thers are generally accepted in a s!ciety, F!r e3a$ple0 the attri- tes !" physical attractiveness li2ea-ility and c!$petence are th! ght t! -e c!nsidered i$p!rtant in the Fwestern s!cietyG and pe!ple are willing t! p t a l!t !" e""!rt t! !-tain these attri- tes,
+.1 %/pes of impression management I$pressi!n $anage$ent c!vers an e3tre$ely -r!ad range !" -ehavi! r0 ranging "r!$ s$all things li2e ch!!sing the $ sic !ne listens0 t! straight"!rward -ragging a-! t !neGs per"!r$ances, Aesearch and the!ri.ing int! the se and e""ect !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r has largely dealt with !nly a part !" the wh!le range !" p!ssi-le -ehavi! rs, In !rgani.ati!nal settings0 especially a li$ited n $-er !" ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs have -een researched, In !rder t! -e a-le t! is!late and investigate speci"ic "!r$s !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 several distincti!ns and ta3!n!$ies have -een $ade, & "irst distincti!n can -e $ade -etween ver-al and n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r,
* 1' *
+.1.* ?on!ver'al tactics B!n*ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent can -e split p -etween the displaying !" arte"acts and e3pressive -ehavi! rs 9Schneider0 19>1;, &rte"acts can -e e3plicitly designed t! represent a certain stat s !r past per"!r$ance, #3a$ples !" these are ni"!r$s and $edals, +hey can als! i$plicitly hint at val es a pers!n has0 !r s!cial categ!ries a pers!n -el!ngs t!, F!r e3a$ple0 !""ices and even -edr!!$s can -e dec!rated t! display a certain i$age t! visit!rs 98!sling0 :!0 Mannarelli0 & M!rris0 '00'; and $any c!$$ercials are -ased !n the i$plicit lin2 pe!ple have -etween certain pr!d cts and a desired i$age, /andsha2ing0 "r!wns0 eye c!ntact0 and s$iles are e3a$ples !" e3pressive -ehavi! r, +hey are de$!nstrated t! -e perceived -y !thers at least as $!$entary $!!ds and "eelings !" the act!r and they $ay even -e ta2en as evidence !" pers!nal disp!siti!ns 9Schneider0 19>1;, +here"!re0 they can als! -e sed -y pe!ple t! create i$pressi!ns in !thers, B!n*ver-al e3pressi!ns are !"ten ass!ciated with the e3pressi!ns !" e$!ti!n, /!wever0 these -ehavi! rs can c!nvey a wide range !" in"!r$ati!n0 s ch as) in"!r$ati!n relevant t! !pini!ns0 $!!ds0 val es0 pers!nality disp!siti!ns0 psych!path!l!gies0 physical states s ch as "atig e0 and c!gnitive states s ch as c!$prehensi!n !r -e" ddle$ent 9He5a l!0 199';, B!n*ver-al -ehavi! rs have several characteristics that disting ish the$ "r!$ ver-al -ehavi! rs "!r the characteristics) Non-verbal behaviour is irrepressible, +here is always s!$e n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r, #ven i" pe!ple try t! -e as passive as p!ssi-le0 they are perceived as ine3pressive0 inhi-ited0 withdrawn0 !r ptight, Non-verbal behaviour is linked to emotion, &s !pp!sed t! ver-al -ehavi! rs0 there see$s t! -e certain a t!$atic lin2s -etween the elicitati!n !" e$!ti!n and the triggering !" "acial $ scles, Non-verbal behaviour is less accessible to actors than to observers, &ct!rs d! n!t see their "acial and p!st ral -ehavi! rs and they d!n n!t hear their t!ne !" v!ice0 as !-servers d!, Non-verbal behaviour is off-the-record. &s !pp!sed t! ver-al e3pressi!ns0 it is !"ten very di""ic lt t! descri-e a "acial e3pressi!n !r t!ne !" v!ice, Non-verbal behaviour can communicate unique meanings, 4ertain i$pressi!ns can !nly -e c!$$ nicated n!n*ver-ally, * 16 * se !" sel"*presentati!n, He5a l! 9199'; $enti!ns the "!ll!wing
Non-verbal behaviour occurs quickly. Many n!n*ver-al e3pressi!ns !cc r instantly a"ter an event has ta2en place0 while pe!ple !"ten need s!$e ti$e t! "!r$ late and c!nvey ver-al reacti!ns, I$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r !"ten is a $i3 !" ver-al as well as n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r, & client0 entering a pr!"essi!nally dec!rated !""ice !" a - siness partner0 $ay enc! nter a pers!n wearing an e3pensive - siness s it wh! s$ilingly sha2es his hand while $a2ing hi$ a c!$pli$ent, %eca se !" the characteristics !" e3pressive n!n*ver-al -ehavi! rs0 they can have niE e e""ects !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics, 8!""$an 919(9; n!ted that pe!ple0 when atte$pting t! "!r$ realistic i$pressi!ns !" !thers0 !"ten l!!2 at less c!ntr!lla-le -ehavi! r0 li2e "acial e3pressi!ns !r -!dy p!st re0 t! chec2 "!r cl es a-! t the tr th" lness !" a displayed i$pressi!n, Ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent is !"ten -ac2ed p -y n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r, F!r e3a$ple0 when a c!$pli$ent is acc!$panied -y a s$ile, /!wever0 n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r can als! give signals that are c!ntradict!ry t! ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent state$ents, F!r e3a$ple0 -y r!lling !nce eyes !r p tting !n a " nny "ace an act!r can try t! distance hi$sel" !" what he j st said 9@eary0 199(;, Schneider 919>1; hinted that s2il" l i$pressi!n $anage$ent pr!-a-ly depends !n creating a g!!d $i3 !" di""erent 2inds !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r, +! c!ncl de0 alth! gh $!st research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent "!c ses at ver-al -ehavi! r0 it is i$p!rtant t! 2eep in $ind that it !"ten c!nsists !" a s -tle c!$-inati!n !" ver-al and n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r which t!gether in"l ence the "!r$ati!n !" an i$pressi!n -y an a dience,
+.1.+ @er'al tactics Ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent has !"ten -een split acE isitive tactics, 5r!tective tactics are p -etween pr!tective tactics and
sed in resp!nse t! p!!r per"!r$ances0 while
acE isitive tactics have the p rp!se !" esta-lishing a certain identity 9+edeschi & Mel- rg0 19>7;, 5r!tective tactics are s ally applied "!ll!wing predica$ents, +hese are) Fsit ati!ns in which events have ndesira-le i$plicati!ns "!r the identity*relevant i$ages act!rs have clai$ed !r desire t! clai$ in "r!nt !" real !r i$agined a diencesG 9Schlen2er0 19>00 pp,1'(;, #3a$ples !" predica$ents are $ista2es and -l nders, +hey ind ce in pe!ple "eelings !" disc!$"!rt with the sit ati!n and a tendency t! rest!re their h rt sel"*i$age, In s ch cases0 re$edial tactics0 called acc! nts0 can -e sed t! red ce the negative i$pact !" s ch an identity * 17 *
"ail re 9A!sen"eld et al,0 199(;, ?ith an e3c se0 the pers!n ad$its that the acti!n was wr!ng - t the resp!nsi-ility "!r the acti!n is denied, ?ith a j sti"icati!n0 !n the !ther hand0 the pers!n accepts the resp!nsi-ility - t gives reas!n "!r why the acti!n is n!t s! -ad, &cE isitive i$pressi!n $anage$ent di""ers "r!$ pr!tective tactics in that it is n!t !nly ai$ed at Fsaving "aceG a"ter predica$ents - t at actively creating a speci"ic i$age, &cE isitive tactics have $ainly -een disting ished -y the p rp!se they serve, & "irst distincti!n has -een $ade -etween ingratiati!n !n the !ne hand and sel"*pr!$!ti!n !n the !ther, +he ingratiat!r has the p rp!se !" -eing li2ed !r seen as attractive while the sel"*pr!$!ter wants t! -e seen as c!$petent 98!d"rey0 =!nes0 & @!rd0 19>61 =!nes & 5itt$an0 19>';, 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; sh!wed that these p rp!ses are n!t always c!$pati-le, In a research !n the di""erences -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n0 they "! nd that sel"*pr!$!ti!n can lead t! a decrease !" li2ing "!r the sel"*pr!$!ter -y the target, A d$an 9199>; als! "! nd that "!r w!$en0 it is n!t always p!ssi-le t! create the i$ages !" c!$petence and li2ea-ility at the sa$e ti$e, +hey "! nd that0 "!r w!$en engaging in sel"*pr!$!ti!n $ay -e instr $ental "!r $anaging a c!$petent i$pressi!n0 - t this $ay c!$e at the c!st !" s!cial reprisals "!r vi!lating the gender stere!type t! -e $!dest, & perceived c!nseE ence !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n was that they were seen as less s!cially attractive0 especially -y !ther w!$en, =!nes and 5itt$an 919>'; were the "irst t! devel!p a ta3!n!$y !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics -ased !n the 2ind !" i$ages they intended t! create, +hey devel!ped a ta3!n!$y !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 in which they tried t! incl de the wide variety !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs identi"ied -y preceding researchers, +he tactics they incl de are) 91; Ingratiation, which has the p rp!se !" -eing seen as li2ea-le1 9'; Selfpromotion0 which ai$s at creating an i$age !" c!$petence1 96; !emplification0 which re"ers t! pe!ple wh! $anage the i$pressi!ns !" sel"*sacri"ice and g!ing -ey!nd the call !" d ty in !rder t! gain the attri- tes !" $!ral w!rthiness and dedicati!n1 97; Intimidation, which are tactics !" signalling p!wer !r the p!tential t! p nish !thers0 with the p rp!se !" -eing seen as danger! s1 9(; "upplication0 which re"ers t! tactics ai$ed at creating a needy !r piti" l i$age -y $eans !" de$!nstrating wea2ness and inc!$petence, O" these tactics ingratiati!n and sel"* pr!$!ti!n have the richest research and the!retical hist!ry,
* 1( *
+.1.) Ingratiation =!nes 91967; identi"ied "! r ingratiati!n tactics0 na$ely) c!$pli$entary !ther*enhance$ent0 c!n"!r$ity0 sel"*presentati!n0 and rendering "av! rs, 4!$pli$entary !ther*enhance$ent c!$es cl!se t! the everyday ter$ !" "lattery, +he ingratiat!r sh!ws the target pers!n that he views hi$ p!sitively and c!$pli$ents hi$ !n his vari! s strengths and virt ! s, /e $ay pay attenti!n t! the p!sitive attri- tes !" the target while n!t $enti!ning his $!re negative i$pressi!ns !" the pers!n, V!n2 9'00'; "! nd s!$e c!nvincing evidence "!r the s ccess !" this tactic in an e3peri$ent in which she de$!nstrated that "lattery ind ced $!re "av! ra-le j dge$ents !" the "latterer -y the target c!$pared t! the j dge$ents !" an !-server, +he nderlying reas!ning !" this tactic is that a pers!n will "ind it hard n!t t! li2e s!$e-!dy wh! li2es hi$, Str!ng evidence "!r this reas!ning was s pplied -y an e3peri$ent !" 4 rtis and Miller 919>6; in which they led s -jects t! -elieve that they were li2ed !r disli2ed -y !thers, +hey "! nd ! t that these s -jects recipr!cated this perceived li2ing with attit des and -ehavi! r t!wards th!se !thers, +he sec!nd ingratiati!n tactic =!nes $enti!ned is c!n"!r$ity, 5e!ple tend t! c!n"!r$ with !thers !n several di$ensi!ns, S!ci!l!gical research de$!nstrated that s!cial in"l ence can ind ce c!n"!r$ing -ehavi! r, &s &sch 919((; and =anis 91971; de$!nstrated0 nder s!cial press re pe!ple tend t! c!n"!r$ t! gr! p state$ents0 n!r$s0 and !pini!ns, 4!n"!r$ity can ta2e place -y $eans !" ver-al state$ents !" agree$ent and c!nverging val es0 - t it can als! ta2e place !n the level !" physical -ehavi! r 94hartrand & %argh0 19991 van %aaren0 /!lland0 Steenaert0 & van :nippen-erg0 '006; and even with $!!ds and e$!ti!ns 9Be $ann & Strac20 '000;, Aesearch !n s!cial $i$icry sh!ws that pe!ple tend t! $i$ic the -ehavi! r !" !thers with which they are in s!cial interacti!n and this has a p!sitive e""ect !n li2ing, 4hartrand and %argh 91999; c!ncl ded "r!$ an e3peri$ent that0 $i$ic2ing the -ehavi! r !" !thers "acilitates s$!!th interacti!n and increases li2ing -etween interacti!n partners, Van %aaren et al, 9'006; c!nd cted an e3peri$ent in which a waitress $i$ic2ed hal" her c st!$ers and did n!t $i$ic the !ther hal", +he res lts indicated that pe!ple wh! were $i$ic2ed gave -igger tips than the c!ntr!l gr! p, S!0 $i$ic2ing has the e""ect !" $a2ing pe!ple $!re gener! s t!wards the i$itat!r, He tsch and 8erard 919((; already rec!gni.ed that attracti!n see2ing !r attracti!n $aintenance was !ne !" the reas!ns t! engage in !pini!n c!n"!r$ity, +he si$ilarity*attracti!n hyp!thesis !" %yrne 91971; states that pe!ple are $!re tended t! li2e th!se !thers wh! have si$ilar val es, %!hra and 5andey 919>7; sh!wed that pe!ple e3press !pini!ns !r acts that are c!nsistent with an!ther pers!nGs attit des0 -elie"s0 and * 16 *
val es in !rder t! increase li2ing, +! c!ncl de0 research "r!$ a wide variety !" perspectives de$!nstrated that c!n"!r$ity0 either sed c!nsci! sly !r nc!nsci! sly0 see$s t! -e a highly e""ective way !" $a2ing an act!r $!re attractive t! i$p!rtant !thers, =!nes 91967; arg es that sel"*presentati!n can -e a tactic !" ingratiati!n i" it inv!lves the e3plicit presentati!n !r descripti!n !" !neGs !wn attri- tes t! increase the li2elih!!d !" -eing j dged as attractive, &s the research !" 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; and A d$an 9199>; de$!nstrated0 n!t all sel"*presentati!n can -e seen as ingratiati!n, #3cessive sel"*pr!$!ti!n will s ally have $!re negative than p!sitive e""ects !n li2ing, /!wever0 presenting !nesel" in a way that is val ed -y the target is e3pected t! increase attractiveness -y that target, %a $eister 919>9; calls this "!r$ !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent Fpleasing the a dienceG and $a2es the lin2 with the tactic !" c!n"!r$ity -eca se it inv!lves c!n"!r$ing t! the a dienceGs pre"erences, & c!$$!n e3a$ple !" this tactic is the e$pl!yee wh! presents hi$sel" in the way he thin2s his -!ss w! ld li2e t! see hi$, #3e$pli"icati!n is a tactic that inv!lves sel"* presentati!ns that c!nvey an i$pressi!n !" integrity and $!ral w!rthiness 9=!nes & 5itt$an0 19>';, +hey are $!st li2ely t! -e sed i" the target val es th!se virt es 9@eary0 199(;, Canna and 5ac2 9197(; "! nd ! t that w!$en0 when they were as2ed t! present the$selves t! a desira-le $ale partner0 were inclined t! adj st their !wn sel"*presentati!ns t! what they -elieved the $ale ad$ired in a w!$an, In c!ncl si!n0 alth! gh certain sel"*presentati!ns can -e in c!n"lict with the p rp!se !" ingratiati!n0 s!$e sel"*presentati!ns can -e sed t! increase li2ing and attractiveness, +he "! rth tactic !" ingratiati!n is rendering "av! rs, +he rati!nal "!r this tactics lies in the n!r$ !" recipr!city p!sited -y 8! ldner 91960;0 which states that we sh! ld repay !thers i" they have "av! red s in s!$e way, Fav! r d!ing0 especially when it is n!t reE ested0 is e3pected t! create li2ing "!r the "av! r d!er and a "eeling !" !-ligati!n t! repay the "av! r,
+.1., Self!promotion +he sel"*pr!$!ter wants t! -e seen as c!$petent, +his can either -e !n general a-ility di$ensi!ns0 "!r e3a$ple intelligence0 !r !n speci"ic s2ills0 li2e playing the pian! 9A!sen"eld et al,0 199(;, 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; "! nd that sel"*pr!$!ti!n is a $!re pr!active pr!cess than ingratiati!n which is relatively reactive, Ingratiat!rs $a2e $!re se !" listening s2ills and react t! the resp!nses !" the target -y $eans !" n!dding0 s$iling and agreeing, Sel"*pr!$!ters !n the !ther hand0 cann!t a""!rd t! -e t!! reactive -eca se they $ st $a2e clai$s a-! t their * 17 *
!wn c!$petence !r "ind ways t! s!$eh!w display their c!$petence t! the target, 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; "! nd that in a c!nversati!n0 reaching the g!al !" -eing seen as c!$petent t rned ! t t! -e $!re di""ic lt "!r the s -jects than reaching the g!al !" -eing seen as li2ea-le, +here are several tactics that pe!ple can se t! pr!$!te their selves, +he $!st straight"!rward way !" creating an i$age !" c!$petence is -y a de$!nstrati!n !" this c!$petence, S!cial "acilitati!n the!ry has sh!wn that the $ere presence !" !ther pe!ple can increase the e""!rt they p t int! a certain tas2 9:ent0 1997;, #val ati!n apprehensi!n the!ry 9Myers0 '00'; arg es that this increase in e""!rt arises -eca se pe!ple have the s!cially learned e3pectati!n that they will -e eval ated -y !thers, %a $eister 919>9; there"!re arg es that an i$p!rtant reas!n why pe!ple try t! d! a g!!d j!- is -eca se !" the i$pressi!n that will $a2e !n !thers, 8!""$an 919(9; ses the c!ncept !" dra$atic reali.ati!n t! indicate that j st d!ing an acti!n is n!t always en! gh t! $a2e !thers aware !" the acti!n !ne intends t! de$!nstrate, S!$eti$es an act!r wants t! e$phasi.e that an acti!n is -eing d!ne !r sh!w that he is lin2ed t! the acti!n, S!$e acti!ns0 li2e pri.e "ighting !r playing the vi!lin0 $ay have dra$atic val e -y the$selves, /!wever0 $any !ther acti!ns need s!$e dra$ati.ing t! -ec!$e salient "!r an a dience, &n e3a$ple 8!""$an $enti!ns0 is the service ind stry where it is !"ten n!t i$$ediately clear what is -eing d!ne "!r clients -eca se the client is n!t a-le t! see where the !verhead c!sts g! t!, +here"!re s!$e dra$ati.ing0 li2e c!$$ nicating and de$!nstrating what gets d!ne and displaying arte"acts that represent the pr!cess0 is needed t! de$!nstrate the val e !" the service t! the client, #specially a"ter a s ccess" l per"!r$ance0 pe!ple will tend t! highlight !r e3aggerate their relati!nship t! the s ccess" l ! tc!$e 9Schlen2er0 19>0;, &s acc! nting tactics are sed t! red ce the negative e""ect !" predica$ents -y distancing !nesel" "r!$ a negative event !r d!wnplaying the event0 !n the !ther hand0 acclai$ing tactics are sed t! e3plain a desira-le event in a way that $a3i$i.es the desira-le i$plicati!ns "!r the act!r 9Schlen2er0 19>0;, In s $0 t! engage in an acti!n is n!t always s ""icient t! de$!nstrate !nes c!$petence in it0 the attenti!n !" the a dience als! has t! -e drawn and it $ st -e ass red that the a dience reali.es the " ll val e !" the acti!n, +he tw! "!r$s !" acclai$ing Schlen2er 919>0; $enti!ns are entitle$ents and enhance$ents, #ntitle$ents are atte$pts t! $a3i$i.e resp!nsi-ility "!r an event and enhance$ents are atte$pts t! $a3i$i.e the perceived val e !" the event, &n!ther way !" pr!$!ting !nesel" is -y $a2ing sel"*enhancing p -lic ann! nce$ents, +hese ann! nce$ents can -e clai$s !" attri- tes that the act!r act ally p!ssesses0 - t !" which he is ncertain i" his a dience will rec!gni.e the$ in hi$0 i" he d!es n!t $enti!n he$, +hey can als! -e sel"*gl!ri"icating state$ents0 inc!ngr ent with reality0 which the act!r wants his * 1> *
a dience t! thin2 he p!ssesses, Schlen2er 9197(; "! nd ! t that s -jects presented the$selves as E ite c!$petent when res lts a-! t tests they $ade were 2ept an!ny$! s0 while they presented the$selves $!re realistically when in"!r$ati!n a-! t their per"!r$ance was e3pected t! -ec!$e p -lic, =!nes and 5it$an 919>'; n!ticed that sel"*pr!$!ters s!$eti$es "ace the s! called sel"*pr!$!terGs parad!3, &cc!rding t! this parad!30 pe!ple wh! are really g!!d at s!$ething0 !"ten d! n!t need t! e3plicitly present the$selves as c!$petent, +here"!re0 the a dience c! ld reas!n that pe!ple wh! engage in sel"*pr!$!ti!n $ay act ally -e inc!$petent0 !therwise they w! ld n!t have t! pr!$!te the$selves, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n $ay there"!re parad!3ically -e seen as c!vering a lac2 !" c!$petence instead !" as evidence "!r c!$petence,
+.; Impression management measures and scales In !rder t! -e a-le t! engage in E antitative research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 $eas re$ent devices and scales have t! -e c!nstr cted that !-jectively $eas re and discri$inate -etween di""erent i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs, & distincti!n can -e $ade -etween tw! $eth!ds 9%!lin! & + rley0 1999;, +he "irst $eth!d is !-serving and rec!rding i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r in an e3peri$ental !r nat ral setting, +his $eth!d has the -ene"it that a -r!ad range !" -ehavi! rs can -e st died and sit ati!n speci"ic i$pressi!n $anage$ent techniE es can -e ta2en int! acc! nt, &ls!0 -eca se it d!esnGt rely !n sel"* rep!rts0 s!cial desira-ility is n!t a pr!-le$, &n e3a$ple !" this $eth!d is the e3peri$ent !" 8!d"rey et al, 919>6;0 in which they as2ed raters t! analyse the vide!taped i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r !" ingratiating and !" sel"*pr!$!ting s -jects, In this st dy0 the raters were as2ed t! $a2e "reE ency c! nts !" the ver-al as well as the n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r that s -jects displayed d ring a c!nversati!n, & draw-ac2 !" this $eth!d is that di""erent strategies cann!t -e easily di""erentiated -eca se it is n!t always clear with what p rp!se an acti!n is nderta2en 98!d"rey et al,0 19>6;, +his $a2es it di""ic lt t! divide the displayed -ehavi! r !" s -jects !ver traditi!nal i$pressi!n $anage$ent categ!ries0 as these categ!ries are !"ten -ased !n the p rp!ses the tactics serve, F rther$!re0 !-servati!n is a ti$e c!ns $ing activity and itGs !"ten di""ic lt t! get per$issi!n in a nat ral sit ati!n0 li2e "!r e3a$ple an !rgani.ati!n0 t! !-serve pe!ple 9%!lin! & + rnley0 1999;, +he !ther appr!ach ta2en -y researchers t! $eas re i$pressi!n $anage$ent is -y $eans !" as2ing s -jects t! answer E esti!ns !n the "reE ency !" their i$pressi!n $anage$ent * 19 *
-ehavi! r, +his $eth!d has the -ene"it that it is easy t! ad$inister1 it c!sts relatively little ti$e t! devel!p a E esti!nnaire and $a2e s -jects "ill it in0 as !pp!sed t! !-serving and analysing their -ehavi! r, F rther$!re0 itGs !"ten easier t! get per$issi!n and "ind pe!ple willing t! "ill in a E esti!nnaire, Several E esti!nnaires atte$pting t! $eas re i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 have -een devel!ped -y researchers,
"ocial #esirability &s i$pressi!n $anage$ent deals with c!ntr!lling the i$pressi!ns that are "!r$ed in !thers0 s -jects "illing in an i$pressi!n $anage$ent E esti!nnaire $ay try t! c!ntr!l the i$pressi!ns the researcher "!r$s !" the$, +hey can d! this -y "illing in the E esti!nnaire in s ch a way that they will -e seen as li2ea-le !r c!$petent, & draw-ac2 !" E esti!nnaires there"!re0 is that they can s ""er "r!$ s!cial desira-ility err!rs, S!cial desira-ility re"ers t! the tendency0 t! answer ite$s !" a E esti!nnaire in s ch a way as t! c!$e acr!ss as s!cially attractive !r li2ea-le, +here are tw! views regarding the interpretati!n !" s!cial desira-ility 9@arsen & % ss0 '00';, S!cial desira-ility can -e seen as a dist!rti!n !r err!r in research E esti!nnaires that sh! ld -e $ini$i.ed !r eli$inated, +! c!ntr!l "!r this err!r0 4r!wne and Marl!we 91960; devel!ped the S!cial Hesira-ility Scale, +his scale $eas res the tendency !" resp!ndents t! answer in a s!cially desira-le way, It c!ntains ite$s li2e FIG$ always willing t! ad$it it when I $a2e a $ista2eG, I" a s -ject answers a""ir$ative !n these 2inds !" E esti!ns0 he is e3pected t! -e $!re c!ncerned with his i$age than with the c!rrect answers, +hese s -jects are there"!re !"ten dr!pped "r!$ a research, S!cial desira-ility can als! -e seen as a desira-le trait 9@arsen & % ss0 '00';, It has -een arg ed that -eing $entally healthy $ay entail having an e3aggerated p!sitive view !" !nesel" and !neGs a-ilities, S!0 s!cial desira-le resp!nding can -e seen as healthy adaptive -ehavi! r that pe!ple display t! pr!tect their sel"*i$ages and their s!cial p!siti!ns, In this way0 s!cial desira-ility is seen as a "!r$ !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent ai$ed at creating an i$pressi!n !" s!cially attractive !r li2ea-le,
* '0 *
$ttributive versus %epudiative &actics +he Sel"*5resentati!n Scale !" A!th0 /arris0 and Snyder 919>>; $eas res the tendency t!wards attri- tive vers s rep diative tactics !" sel"*presentati!n, +his distincti!n relates t! the di""erence -etween assertive and de"ensive i$pressi!n $anage$ent !" +edeschi and Mel- rg 919>7;, 5e!ple having an attri- tive i$pressi!n $anage$ent style0 try t! create a "av! ra-le identity -y clai$ing p!sitive traits a-! t the$selves, +! $eas re this0 resp!ndents have t! "ill in i" they c!nsider 60 nrealistically p!sitive state$ents a-! t the$selves tr e !r "alse, +he higher the Ftr eG sc!res0 the higher the pers!n is rated in attri- tive i$pressi!n $anage$ent, 5e!ple sing a rep diative style are p tting e""!rt in trying t! re" te their n"av! ra-le characteristics, +! $eas re this0 resp!ndents indicate i" 60 state$ents0 that descri-e c!$$!nly !cc rring ndesira-le characteristics0 are tr e !r "alse "!r the$, +he higher the F"alseG sc!res !n this $eas re0 the higher a pers!n is rated in rep diative i$pressi!n $anage$ent, &lth! gh the scale $eas res an i$p!rtant di""erence in sel"*presentati!nal style and the tendency t! engage in sel"*presentati!ns0 it is n!t clear what speci"ic i$ages pe!ple sc!ring high !n this scale will try t! create in !thers, &n advantage !" the scale is that it d!es n!t $eas re i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r directly -y as2ing resp!ndents i" they se certain tactics0 - t instead it indirectly ded ces a pers!ns tendency t! $anage the i$pressi!ns he creates in !thers, In this way0 s!cial desira-le resp!nding can -e red ced -eca se resp!ndents will n!t -e a-le t! directly in"l ence the ! tc!$es !" the E esti!nnaires, #ven $!re0 s!cial desira-ility is inc!rp!rated int! the scale,
"ubordinate Influence &actics ?ayne and Ferris 91990; devel!ped a '7*ite$ i$pressi!n $anage$ent scale in !rder t! $eas re s -!rdinate in"l ence tactics, S -!rdinates were as2ed t! rep!rt h!w !"ten they engaged in a certain 2ind !" -ehavi! r, +hey disting ished -etween h!w !"ten a s -!rdinate engaged in s pervis!r*"!c sed0 sel"*"!c sed0 and j!-*"!c sed i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs, /!wever0 the pri$ary "!c s !" ?ayne and Ferris was n!t t! devel!p an i$pressi!n $anage$ent $eas re, /ere "!re0 they did n!t design their E esti!nnaire acc!rding t! statistically valid pr!ced res "!r designing E esti!nnaires, c!nseE ently0 this scale appears * '1 *
t! have s!$e psych!$etric pr!-le$s and a$-ig ity !n the classi"icati!n !" s!$e ite$s !ver di""erent strategies, +his can -e a seri! s pr!-le$ i" !ne wants t! test hyp!theses a-! t ca ses and c!nseE ences !" these di""erent strategies 9%!lin! & + rnley0 1999;,
&he Impression 'anagement "cale of (olino and &urnley In !rder t! "acilitate research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent and t! esta-lish a widely accepted $eas re$ent scale0 %!lin! and + rnley 91999; created0 and e3tensively tested0 an i$pressi!n $anage$ent scale, +hey generated ite$s -y investigating the e3isting literat re and scales !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent and $!di"ying !r rewriting these ite$s t! ens re "ace validity and esta-lish c!nsistency in t!ne and perspective, %ased !n the =!nes and 5itt$an ta3!n!$y 919>'; they divided the ite$s int! the "ive strategies !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 ingratiati!n0 e3e$pli"icati!n0 inti$idati!n0 and s pplicati!n, Aesp!ndents are as2ed t! indicate !n a scale0 h!w !"ten they engage in a certain 2ind !" -ehavi! r, Fr!$ their answers it can -e ded ced h!w high they sc!re !n the "ive di""erent -ehavi! ral categ!ries, +he =!nes and 5itt$an ta3!n!$y is a se" l t!!l "!r research -eca se !" itGs -readth relative t! !ther scales0 itGs "!c s !n speci"ic -ehavi! rs0 and itGs "ir$ gr! nding in the!ry 9%!lin! & + rnley0 1999;, M!re!ver it has -een e3tensively tested and re"ined -y %!lin! and + rnley 91999;0 s! that it can -e sed as an appr!priate $eas re$ent scale "!r research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent, /!wever0 it c!vers !nly a part !" the wh!le range !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs, F!r the sa2e !" c!nsistency it is i$p!ssi-le t! ta2e int! acc! nt all -ehavi! r relevant t! i$pressi!n $anage$ent, +he c!ncept is s! wide that n!t all 2inds !" -ehavi! r can -e incl ded in a ta3!n!$y, & li$itati!n !" a E esti!nnaire li2e the !ne !" %!lin! and + rnley 91999; is that with s ch a E esti!nnaire it is n!t p!ssi-le t! c!ver speci"ic n!n*ver-al i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 -eca se li2e He5a l! 9199'; wr!te0 they are !"ten !"" the rec!rd, +his is a draw-ac20 especially -eca se these n!n*ver-al -ehavi! rs are e3pected t! -e highly interrelated with the ver-al tactics and the s ccess" l ! tc!$es !" these tactics, F rther$!re0 -eca se the scale disting ishes i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics -y their intended ! tc!$es0 it is li$ited t! the "ive i$pressi!ns !") li2ea-ility0 c!$petence0 virt e0 danger0 and piti" l, /!wever0 there are a l!t $!re i$pressi!ns that a pers!n c! ld li2e t! display in s!cial sit ati!ns, F!r e3a$ple0 pe!ple c! ld want !thers t! see the$ as t! gh0 c!nscienti! s0 !r !pen*$inded, +! c!ncl de0 alth! gh the scale is statistically designed and relatively -r!ad c!$pared t! !thers scales0 a draw-ac2 is that it is n!t all c!$passing, * '' *
(alanced Inventory of #esirable %esponding 5a lh sG 919>7; %alanced Invent!ry !" Hesira-le Aesp!nding $eas res tw! di""erent aspects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent, +he Fsel"*deceptive enhance$entG s -scale $eas res sel"* deceptive !verc!n"idence1 it $eas res the tendency !" individ als t! syste$atically eval ate the$selves !vertly p!sitive, +he Fi$pressi!n $anage$entG s -scale $eas res the tendency t! present !nesel" deli-erately "av! ra-le t! !thers, In sh!rt0 the E esti!nnaire $a2es a distincti!n -etween !vertly "av! ra-le sel"*rep!rts that an individ al act ally -elieves and sel"*rep!rts !" which the individ al 2n!ws that they are t!! g!!d t! -e tr e,
"elf-monitoring +he sel"*$!nit!ring scale !" Snyder 91977; can als! -e seen as a $eas re !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent 9A!sen"eld et al,0 199(;, +his scale $eas res the di""erence in the e3tent t! which pe!ple can and d! !-serve and c!ntr!l their e3pressive -ehavi! r, /ence0 it n!t !nly "!c ses !n the tendency t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 - t als! !n h!w s2il" l a pers!n is in it, +he scale can -e seen as e3isting ! t !" tw! layers 9Snyder & 8angestad0 19>6;, On !ne level0 the scale $eas res the nderlying pers!nality c!nstr ct !" sel"*$!nit!ring0 which even $ight have a genetic -ase, On the !ther level0 the scale c!nsists ! t !" three "act!rs that represent distinct - t interrelated c!nstr cts, +he "irst "act!r0 e3pressive c!ntr!l0 c!ncerns the a-ility t! actively c!ntr!l e3pressive -ehavi! r, +he sec!nd0 s!cial stage presence0 $eas res the pr!pensity t! per"!r$ in s!cial sit ati!ns and attract attenti!n t! !nesel", +he third0 !ther*directed sel"*presentati!n0 $eas res in h!w "ar a pers!n acts the way he is e3pected t! act -y !thers, S!0 the scale $eas res the tendency !" pe!ple t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r, M!re e3plicitly0 %!lin! and + rnley 9'006; de$!nstrated that high sel"*$!nit!rs have a tendency t! apply p!sitive i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics0 ai$ed at creating a desired i$age, 5!sitive i$ages s ch as ingratiati!n0 sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 and e3e$pli"icati!n are sed t! $a2e a p!sitive i$pressi!n !n !thers, +hey can -e !pp!sed t! the tactics !" inti$idati!n and s pplicati!n which have the p rp!se !" creating the !"ten negatively eval ated i$pressi!ns !" needy and inti$idating, F rther$!re the scale $eas res h!w s ccess" l a pers!n is e3pected t! -e in presenting hi$sel"0 - t it d!es
* '6 *
n!t disting ish -etween the di""erent 2inds !" strategies and tactics that this -ehavi! r can e3ist !", +he sel"*$!nit!ring scale has -een str!ngly critici.ed -y several the!rists, +here see$s t! -e evidence that the di""erent c!$p!nents d! n!t c!rrelate and s!$eti$es even c!rrelate negatively with each !ther 9%riggs & 4hee20 19>>;, F rther$!re0 the c!$p!nents have -een sh!wn t! c!rrelate in di""erent directi!ns with e3ternal c!ncepts, +he "act!rs !" e3pressive c!ntr!l and s!cial stage presence c!rrelated p!sitively with a $eas re !" sel"*c!n"idence while the !ther*directedness "act!r c!rrelated negatively with the sa$e $eas re 94hee2 & % ss0 19>1;, %eca se !" these "indings0 the critics p t int! d! -t the e3istence !" the nderlying c!ncept !" sel"*$!nit!ring, Snyder and 8angestad 919>6; reacted t! this critiE e -y de$!nstrating that still a $ay!r p!rti!n !" the ite$s !" the scale l!aded p!sitively !n the general sel"*$!nit!ring c!nstr ct, In !rder t! increase the strength !" this general "act!r they decided t! dr!p 7 !" the '( ite$s0 s! that !nly th!se ite$s0 with a "act!r l!ading !" higher than 001( !n the general c!nstr ct0 were retained, %riggs and 4hee2 919>>; arg ed that the dr!pped ite$s $ainly represented the !ther* directedness "act!r !" the scale, 4!nseE ently the e$phasis !" the revised scale is $!re !n the !ther tw! "act!rs, %eca se these tw! !ther "act!rs c!rrelate str!ngly with !ther pers!nality $eas res li2e sel"*c!n"idence0 s!cial s rgency0 and e3traversi!n0 the niE eness !" the c!ncept was cast int! d! -t, =!hn0 4hee20 and :l!hnen 91996; even clai$ed that the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale $eas res e3traversi!n, +hey as2ed Snyder t! de"ine sel"*$!nit!ring -y $eans !" p!sitive and negative c!rrelati!ns with ite$s ! t !" a standard ite$ p!le, +hey "! nd that the c!nstr ct created in this way c!varied $!re with a c!nstr ct !" e3traversi!n than with the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale, /!wever0 it is E esti!na-le in h!w "ar this arti"icially created c!nstr ct really represents the sel"*$!nit!ring c!nstr ct, 8angestad and Snyder 9'000; de"ended their c!nstr ct with an e3tensive investigati!n !" the relati!ns -etween the sel"*$!nit!ring c!nstr ct and e3ternal c!ncepts, +hey c!ncl ded that the relati!nship !" sel"*$!nit!ring with e3ternal c!nstr cts was s ""iciently niE e "!r sel"* $!nit!ring t! -e seen as a niE e c!nstr ct, +he relati!ns -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and !ther c!nstr cts were di""erent than the relati!n !" e3traversi!n with th!se !thers c!nstr cts, F rther$!re they c!ncl ded that the e$phasis !n attenti!n and resp!nsiveness t! !thers had -een wea2ened in the new 1>*ite$ scale as !pp!sed t! the !ld '(*ite$ scale, %eca se !" this0 the negative relati!n with sel"*c!n"idence is wea2ened and they state that the sel"*$!nit!ring c!nstr ct will -e $!re str!ngly related t! acE isitive as !pp!sed t! pr!tective i$pressi!n $anage$ent, +he r!le !" reactiveness and the str!ng tendency t! assess appr!priate -ehavi! r * '7 *
"r!$ c es "r!$ the a dience is de*e$phasised, Instead the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale can -e seen a $eas re !" the pers!nal disp!siti!n t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent ai$ed at the active c!nstr cti!n !" p -lic selves0 designed t! achieve s!cial ends 9Snyder & 8angestad0 '000;,
+.0 Success factors of impression management O" c! rse0 the "reE ency !" a certain 2ind !" -ehavi! r is n!t en! gh t! predict the s ccess !" the intended ! tc!$e !" that -ehavi! r, 4reating a desired i$pressi!n in !thers !"ten depends !n a th!r! gh assess$ent !" a sit ati!n and the s2il" l applicati!n !" a -r!ad range !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent techniE es, +he s ccess !" an atte$pt t! esta-lish a certain i$age can depend0 as well !n the sit ati!n0 as !n an act!rGs pers!nal s2ills in presenting hi$sel", &n e3a$ple !" s ch a sit ati!n "act!r -ec!$es evident -y the ingratiat!rGs dile$$a, +his predicts that it is $!re di""ic lt t! s cceed in an ingratiati!n atte$pt0 the $!re dependent an act!r is !n the target0 -eca se the target will -e $!re inclined t! l!!2 "!r hidden reas!ns "!r the act!rGs -ehavi! r, &n e3a$ple !" a pers!nal "act!r that in"l ences i$pressi!n $anage$ent s ccess is de$!nstrated -y the "indings !" 8!d"rey et al, 919>6;, +hey "! nd that s ccess" l presenters see$ed t! -e $!re nat ral and at h!$e with the tactic they sed than ns ccess" l presenters, Schneider 919>1; $a2es a distincti!n -etween the i$pressi!ns that a pers!n wants !thers t! have !" hi$ and the additi!nal i$pressi!ns he creates in !thers nintenti!nally, +he "!r$er0 he calls the pri$ary !r calc lated i$pressi!ns while the later are the sec!ndary i$pressi!n, +he sec!ndary i$pressi!ns are n!t necessarily ndesira-le0 they are j st n!t intended, F!r e3a$ple0 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; "! nd that s -jects sing ingratiati!n tactics als! were perceived as $!re c!$petent0 even th! gh they did n!t speci"ically intend t! -e seen as c!$petent, In this case0 the sec!ndary i$pressi!n was c!$petence0 which is nder $!st circ $stances a desired i$pressi!n, &n act!r $ay happily accept in"erences "r!$ his -ehavi! r as l!ng as these are c!nsistent with the act ally desired i$pressi!n, /!wever0 the pr!-a-ility e3ists that the a dience will draw in"erences that are inc!nsistent with the desired i$age 9Schneider0 19>1;, &n additi!nal pr!-le$ with these sec!ndary i$pressi!ns is that -eca se !" their nintenti!nal nat re0 they are -y de"initi!n n!t $anagea-le, %eca se the sa$e -ehavi! r can -e interpreted in di""erent ways0 a target can draw in"erences that are di""erent than intended -y the act!r, It is als! p!ssi-le that the credi-ility !" the calc lated i$pressi!ns are called int! d! -t1 the a dience * '( *
$ay in"er that the presentati!n d!es n!t $ean what it see$s, Several aspects have an i$pact !n h!w s ccess" l an act!r is e3pected t! -e in his i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r, )ombinations of verbal and nonverbal e!pressions. &s 8!""$an 919(9; already n!ticed) +he a dience $ay se0 what are c!nsidered t! -e the ng!verna-le aspects !" e3pressive -ehavi! r0 as a chec2 p!n the validity !" what is c!nveyed -y the g!verna-le aspects, %eca se !" their direct lin2 with e$!ti!ns0 their i$$ediateness0 and their irrepressi-ility0 it is as g!!d as i$p!ssi-le t! c!ntr!l all e3pressive -ehavi! rs 9He5a l!0 199';, #ven an e3tre$ely s2illed act!r will n!t -e a-le t! $in tely c!ntr!l all $ scles !" his "ace0 his -!dy p!st re0 -reathing0 and all the e3tra in"!r$ati!n that $ight c!$e t! the availa-ility !" his a dience, +here"!re all the nc!ntr!lled !r nc!ntr!lla-le -ehavi! r can give c es t! the a dience that can lead t! "ar "r!$ intended i$ages, & lie detect!r is a typical device t! chec2 "!r s ch0 as g!!d as nc!ntr!lla-le0 -ehavi! r that can lead t! a c!$pletely di""erent i$age !" a pers!n, Knowledge of attributional styles. Schneider 919>1; ac2n!wledges that a s2il" l i$pressi!n $anager $ st n!t !nly -e a s2illed act!r0 he $ st als! have s!phisticated 2n!wledge !" h!w his a dience will perceive and interprete his acti!ns, In !ther w!rds0 the act!r $ st try t! ga ge what pr!cesses his a dience ses t! c!$e t! c!ncl si!ns a-! t his -ehavi! r, S!$e insight int! the attri- ti!nal style !" the target is at least necessary t! ded ce what e""ect a certain i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic will have !n the a dience, &ttri- ti!n the!ry deals with h!w pe!ple e3plain the -ehavi! r !" !thers1 "!r e3a$ple -y attri- ting it either t! internal disp!siti!ns !r t! e3ternal sit ati!ns 9Myers0 '00';, Fletcher0 Hanil!vics0 Fernande.0 5eters!n0 and Aeeder 919>6; "! nd that pe!ple di""er in the c!$ple3ity !" the pr!cess in which they engage when they "!r$ attri- ti!ns a-! t !thers, +hey "! nd that s!$e pe!ple are disp!sed t! engage in an ela-!rate pr!cess !" th!r! ghly investigating the ca ses !" the -ehavi! r -e"!re $a2ing attri- ti!ns, Other pe!ple0 !n the !ther hand0 are inclined t! $a2e relatively si$ple attri- ti!ns with! t p tting $ ch e""!rt int! this pr!cess, & target with a si$ple attri- ti!nal style $ay "!r e3a$ple0 attri- te an ingratiat!ry c!$pli$ent t! the 2indness !" the act!r0 while a target with a $!re c!$ple3 attri- ti!nal style $ay ded ce that the reas!ns "!r $a2ing the c!$pli$ent are $!re c!$ple3 and pr!-a-ly inv!lve s!$e lteri!r $!tives !n the part !" the act!r, "elf-monitoring. + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; reas!ned that the i$pressi!n $anage$ent techniE es !" the =!nes and 5itt$an 919>'; ta3!n!$y c! ld lead t! p!sitive as well as t! negative i$ages, F!r e3a$ple ingratiati!n c! ld lead t! -eing seen as li2ea-le - t als! t! -eing seen as a syc!phant, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n c! ld lead t! the i$age !" c!$petent - t als! t! * '6 *
the i$age !" c!nceited, +hey c!nd cted a st dy t! "ind ! t i" high sel"*$!nit!rs were -etter at i$pressi!n $anage$ent than l!w sel"*$!nit!rs, %eca se high sel"*$!nit!rs are sensitive t! the i$age they display0 act li2e s!cial cha$ele!ns0 are $!re sensitive t! s!cial cl es0 and have $!re e3perience in $anaging i$pressi!ns0 they were e3pected t! sc!re higher !n the p!sitive i$ages and l!wer !n the negative i$ages, +he res lts partly s pp!rted this pr!p!siti!n, F!r ingratiati!n0 high sel"*$!nit!rs sc!red higher !n li2ea-ility and l!wer !n syc!phant, F!r sel"* pr!$!ti!n0 high sel"*$!nit!rs sc!red higher !n c!$petence - t n!t really signi"icantly l!wer !n c!nceited, &ls! "!r e3e$pli"icati!n0 the res lts were $!re !r less as e3pected0 - t n!t "!r s pplicati!n and inti$idati!n, It see$s that sel"*$!nit!ring at least has s!$e relevance "!r predicting the s ccess !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r, "elf-efficacy. &n!ther E esti!nnaire that intends t! give s!$e insight int! a "act!r that i$pacts the s ccess !" sel" presentati!ns is the E esti!nnaire !" e""icacy !" sel"*presentati!n !" Miel2e 91990;, %and ra 91997; invented the c!ncept !" sel"*e""icacy as an !pti$istic -elie" a-! t !neGs !wn a-ilities, It entails the sense that !ne is c!$petent and e""ective in c!$pleting a certain tas2, Miel2e 91990; devel!ped a E esti!nnaire t! $eas re the sel"*e""icacy !" sel"* presentati!ns in s!cial sit ati!ns, S!0 the E esti!nnaire !" Miel2e $eas res the degree t! which pe!ple see the$selves as c!$petent and e""ective in presenting desired i$ages t! !thers, +his scale is divided int! three "act!rs) the "irst "act!r $eas res the sel"*e""icacy !" attaining e$!ti!nal attenti!n "r!$ !thers 9li2e sy$pathy !r interest;0 the sec!nd $eas res the sense !" c!$petence and e""ectiveness in attaining intellect al rec!gniti!n0 and the last "act!r $eas res the sel"*e""icacy in reaching $aterial g!als thr! gh sel"*presentati!n, Sel"*e""icacy will in"l ence the tactics and styles !" sel"*presentati!ns and is e3pected t! -e p!sitively c!rrelated with the s ccess" l ! tc!$es !" sel"*presentati!ns 9Miel2e0 1990;, /!wever0 !ther "act!rs li2e a pers!nGs a-ility t! assess the way !thers reas!n a-! t hi$0 will als! play a r!le in the s ccess !" an i$pressi!n $anage$ent atte$pt 9Schneider0 19>1;, & pers!n can "!r e3a$ple c!nsider hi$sel" as very c!$petent at $anaging i$pressi!ns0 while this sense !" sel"*e""icacy is in reality ca sed -y an !vertly !pti$istic view !" h!w !thers see hi$, He5a l!0 /!!ver0 ?e--0 :enny0 and Oliver 919>7; "! nd that alth! gh pe!ple have s!$e acc racy in predicting h!w they are perceived -y !thers0 this acc racy can -e li$ited in s!$e cases, In an e3peri$ent0 they "! nd that s -jects -elieved that they $ade c!nsistent i$pressi!ns !n di""erent !thers while in reality they $ade very di""erent i$pressi!ns !n di""erent pe!ple, S!0 alth! gh sel"*e""icacy is e3pected t! in"l ence the s ccess !" sel"* presentati!nal tactics0 e$pirical research sh! ld -e nderta2en t! investigate the strength !" this in"l ence, * '7 *
& draw-ac2 !" the scale !" Miel2e is the speci"icity !" the ite$s, S!$e ite$s are speci"ically related t! acade$ic sch!lars0 !thers t! $ale s -jects, F!r e3a$ple FIn se$inars I can act s! that !thers thin2 !" $e as a s$art pers!nG !r FIG$ c!nvinced that I can c!$e acr!ss0 !n w!$en0 as sel"*c!n"ident and s peri!rG, +his $a2es it necessary t! rewrite s!$e ite$s i" the E esti!nnaire is t! -e sed in a $!re general c!nte3t, "elf-regulation. &n!ther "act!r that has -een pr!ven t! have an i$p!rtant e""ect !n the s ccess" l ! tc!$es !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent is the a-ility !" an act!r t! reg late his !wn th! ghts and -ehavi! rs, I" a pers!n engages in sel"*reg lat!ry -ehavi! r0 he draws "r!$ a li$ited p!!l !" c!gnitive res! rces 9V!hs0 %a $eister0 & 4iar!cc!0 '00(;, +hese sa$e res! rces are sed "!r a wide variety !" reg lat!ry tas2s0 s ch as reg lati!n !" c!gniti!n and th! ght0 e$!ti!n0 and i$p lsive -ehavi! r, V!hs et al, 9'00(; de$!nstrated0 in a n $-er !" e3peri$ents0 that when a pers!n engages in challenging !r c! nter n!r$ative sel"* presentati!n0 this pers!n draws "r!$ these sel"*reg lat!ry res! rces, +hey de$!nstrated that s -jects0 wh! "irst engaged in challenging !r c! nter n!r$ative sel"*presentati!ns per"!r$ed w!rse and E it earlier !n a s -seE ent sel"*reg lat!ry tas20 than pers!ns wh! had n!t engaged in these sel"*presentati!ns, +he !ther way ar! nd0 s -jects per"!r$ed w!rse !n sel"* presentati!nal tas2s i" they -e"!rehand had t! engage in !ther tas2s that entailed sel"* reg lati!n, +his indicates that the availa-ility !" s ""icient sel"*reg lat!ry res! rces is an i$p!rtant c!nditi!n "!r the s ccess" l ! tc!$es !" challenging and c! nter*n!r$ative sel"* presentati!ns,
+.: Autcomes of impression management 'ehaviour in organizations Organi.ati!nal -ehavi! r deals with the syste$atic st dy !" the acti!ns and attit des that pe!ple e3hi-it within !rgani.ati!ns 9A!--ins0 '006;, %eca se in !rgani.ati!ns0 pe!ple c!ntin ! sly are in s!cial interacti!n with each !ther and s!cial interacti!n is characteri.ed -y interdependence 9Schlen2er0 19>0;0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent plays a $aj!r r!le in !rgani.ati!nal -ehavi! r, In their !rgani.ati!nal lives0 pe!ple depend !n !thers0 try t! in"l ence each !ther0 eval ate each !ther0 and j st si$ply w!r2 t!gether, +hese are all s!cial pr!cesses in which it can -e i$p!rtant "!r pe!ple t! c!ntr!l the i$ages they present t! !thers, Several researchers have e3a$ined the ! tc!$es !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !n !rgani.ati!nal ! tc!$es0 s ch as) j!- interview ! tc!$es0 per"!r$ance appraisals0 pr!$!ti!ns0 salaries0 and e3change E ality, * '> *
M!st !" these researches investigated the ! tc!$es !" the tactics !" ingratiati!n and sel"* pr!$!ti!n, Stevens and :rist!" 9199(; investigated which i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics applicants sed d ring act al j!-*interviews and whether there is a relati!nship -etween the sed tactics and interview ! tc!$es, ?ith respect t! the "irst research E esti!n0 they "! nd that sel"*pr!$!ti!n was sed $!re !"ten than ingratiati!n, ?hen ingratiati!n was sed0 it "!c sed !n the j!- !r !rgani.ati!n rather than !n the interviewer, ?ith respect t! the sec!nd E esti!n they c!ncl ded that higher levels !" tactics were related t! $!re p!sitive ! tc!$es in the "!r$ !" interviewersG eval ati!ns0 and invitati!ns t! visit the c!$pany, #specially ingratiati!n see$s t! have signi"icant p!sitive ! tc!$es "!r the act!r while the e""ects !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n tactics see$ t! -e $!re d! -t" l, ?ayne and @iden 9199(; "! nd that ingratiat!ry i$pressi!n $anage$ent ai$ed at a s pervis!r was p!sitively related t! the s pervis!rGs li2ing "!r a s -!rdinate and percepti!ns !" si$ilarity with that s -!rdinate, @i2ing was p!sitively lin2ed t! perceived si$ilarity0 which in t rn was "! nd t! -e p!sitively related t! s pervis!rGs per"!r$ance ratings !" the s -!rdinates, +hey0 h!wever0 "! nd that sel"*"!c sed i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 which incl ded -!th sel"*pr!$!ti!n and e3e$pli"icati!n0 had a negative e""ect !n the s pervis!rGs li2ing "!r and perceived si$ilarity with the s -!rdinate, ?ayne and Ferris 91990; "! nd that ingratiat!ry s pervis!r "!c sed i$pressi!n $anage$ent had a p!sitive e""ect !n s pervis!rGs li2ing and per"!r$ance appraisal !" the s -!rdinate and e3change E ality with the s -!rdinate, On the !ther hand0 sel"*"!c sed tactics had n! s ch p!sitive e""ects !n per"!r$ance ratings, F!r the sel"* pr!$!ting tactics0 they called j!- "!c sed i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics0 they even "! nd a negative relati!nship with per"!r$ance ratings, 8!rd!n 91996; c!nd cted a $eta*analysis !n the e""ects !" ingratiati!n !n w!r2 ! tc!$es, /e "! nd a s$all p!sitive e""ect "!r the relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and per"!r$ance eval ati!ns and a str!nger e""ect "!r ingratiati!n and li2ing, /!wever0 these ! tc!$es were $!derated -y vari! s varia-les0 li2e the 2ind !" the ingratiati!n tactics sed0 the transparency !" the ingratiati!n atte$pt0 and the directi!n !" the in"l ence atte$pt, F rther$!re0 it t rned ! t that ingratiati!n pr!d ced $!re p!sitive eval ati!ns in pward in"l ence atte$pts than in d!wnward !r lateral atte$pts, /iggins0 = dge0 and Ferris 9'006; c!nd cted a $eta*analysis in which they "! nd p!sitive c!rrelati!ns -etween ingratiati!n techniE es0 related t! i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 and w!r2 ! tc!$es !" e3trinsic s ccess 9e,g,0 salaries and pr!$!ti!n; and per"!r$ance assess$ents, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n again was "! nd t! have !nly a wea2 e""ect !n per"!r$ance assess$ents and e3trinsic s ccess,
* '9 *
%lic2le 9'006; investigated the e""ect !" lateral*i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 and "! nd that i$pressi!n $anage$ent strategies have a p!sitive relati!n with the eval ati!n !" an act!rGs c!$pliance*gaining s ccess with a c!lleag e, &lth! gh s!$e research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent in !rgani.ati!ns has -een d!ne !n d!wnward and lateral tactics0 $!st st dies investigate tactics directed at s!$e!ne higher in hierarchy0 s! called pward i$pressi!n $anage$ent, Aesearch a-! t the e""ects !" d!wnward i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 directed at a s -!rdinate !r lateral i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 directed at peers is still scarce, +his pr!-a-ly -eca se !" the !-servati!n that i$pressi!n $anage$ent will -e sed $!re !"ten in sit ati!ns where the a dience is !" high stat s and !r p!wer and the act!r in s!$e way is dependent !n the a dience 9=!nes0 19671 8ardner & Martin2!0 19>>;, /!wever0 in !rgani.ati!ns0 t! reach satis"act!ry w!r2 ! tc!$es0 pe!ple !"ten have t! w!r2 t!gether and depend !n their c!lleag es0 t! reach satis"act!ry w!r2 ! tc!$es, +hey will have t! de"ine sit ati!ns0 create a g!!d w!r2 at$!sphere0 divide w!r2*r!les0 and in"l ence each !ther t! w!r2 t!wards c!$$!n g!als, /ence0 it is e3pected that i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics will als! play a $ay!r r!le in s!cial interacti!n -etween c!lleag es0 especially when they depend !n each !ther "!r reaching relevant w!r2 ! tc!$es,
+.*< Impression management in groups A!-ins!n 9'006; de"ines a gr! p as tw! !r $!re individ als0 interacting and interdependent0 wh! c!$e t!gether t! achieve partic lar !-jectives, In a gr! p sit ati!n several pr!cesses ta2e place in which i$pressi!n $anage$ent is e3pected t! play a r!le, First !" all0 -eca se !" the interactive and interdependent nat re !" the gr! p pr!cess0 the $e$-ers !" a gr! p will have t! in"l ence each !ther in !rder t! reach their !wn pers!nal g!als and the g!als !" the gr! p, +he i$pressi!ns the !thers have !" a gr! p $e$-er are e3pected t! -e related t! the a$! nt !" in"l ence the pers!n has within the gr! p, Sec!nd and related t! the "irst p!int0 i" n! "!r$al str ct re is pr!vided0 the $e$-ers !" a gr! p will ass $e and assign r!les within the gr! p 9/are0 1997;, +he pr!cess !" dividing r!les cl!sely rese$-les 8!""$anGs 919(9; c!ncept !" creating a de"initi!n !" a sit ati!n1 the $e$-ers c!$$ nicate their e3pectati!ns !" the !thers and what the !thers can e3pect !" the$ in !rder t! create a w!r2a-le de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n, S!0 the divisi!n !" r!les can -e seen as creating a j!intly accepted de"initi!n !" the sit ati!n0 which c!$es a-! t thr! gh the i$pressi!ns pe!ple have !" the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, In clai$ing and assigning r!les0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent is e3pected t! play a r!le, * 60 *
+hird0 i$pressi!ns "!r$ed !" the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p will a""ect $e$-ers li2ing !" each !ther and the willingness t! w!r2 with !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p again !n !ther !ccasi!ns, I$pressi!n $anage$ent !n the gr! p level di""ers "r!$ i$pressi!n $anage$ent !n a !ne*t!* !ne level -eca se the a dience c!nsists !" tw! !r $!re pers!ns wh! have their !wn individ al attri- ti!n styles and their !wn individ al val es, F rther$!re0 gr! p e""ects $ight in"l ence h!w i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics are interpreted -y !thers, %eca se !" this0 the i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r !" an act!r as well as the ! tc!$es !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent atte$pts will di""er !n a gr! p level c!$pared t! in a dyadic sit ati!n, Several "eat res !" gr! ps are e3pected t! play a r!le in these di""erences) #iversity of attributional styles. +! predict the e""ect0 an i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic will have !n the di""erent $e$-ers !" an a dience0 an act!r needs t! have in"!r$ati!n a-! t h!w the di""erent $e$-ers in his a dience will interprete his -ehavi! r 9Schneider0 19>1;, %eca se pe!ple di""er in the way they "!r$ attri- ti!ns !" !thers 9Fletcher et al,0 19>6; a certain -ehavi! r can lead t! di""erent i$pressi!ns in the di""erent $e$-ers !" an a dience, F!r e3a$ple0 a gr! p $e$-er wh! always spea2s "irst at a gr! p $eeting can -e seen as intelligent -y !ne pers!n while an!ther c!lleag e $ight ded ce "r!$ e3actly the sa$e -ehavi! r that he is a -raggart, %eca se !" these pers!nal di""erences in attri- ti!nal style it is $ ch $!re di""ic lt "!r an act!r t! predict the i$pressi!ns he will $a2e !n a gr! p !" pe!ple than !n an individ al, #iversity of audience values, +he a dience als! plays an i$p!rtant r!le in shaping the i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r !" individ als 9Schlen2er & ?eig!ld0 199'1 @eary0 199(1 8ardner & Martin2!0 19>>;, Sel"*presentati!ns are adj sted t! the perceived val es and pre"erences !" the a dience 9@eary0 199(;, = v!nen and M rd!c2 91996; "! nd "!r e3a$ple0 that st dents predicted that peers w! ld attri- te sel"*presentati!n strategies di""erently than their teachers !r parents w! ld, 4!nseE ently th!se st dents indicated that they w! ld vary their e3plicati!ns "!r passing !r "ailing an e3a$0 acc!rding t! the a dience, &lth! gh there are attri- tes that are val ed -y $!st pe!ple0 s ch as 2indness !r help" lness0 there is a large variati!n in the attri- tes pe!ple val e in !thers, +his can res lt in an aw2ward p!siti!n "!r an act!r i" he "inds hi$sel" "aced with an a dience c!nsisting ! t !" individ als with di""erent !r even c!$peting val es, F!r e3a$ple0 !ne gr! p $e$-er $ight val e the c!$petence !" a c!lleag e0 -eca se he wants t! create a g!!d "inal pr!d ct0 while an!ther gr! p $e$-er $ight -e a"raid that a c!lleag e is t!! c!$petent -eca se this can threaten his !wn p!siti!n, * 61 *
+here"!re it can -e di""ic lt "!r an act!r t! tail!r his sel"*presentati!ns t! the di""erent val es !" the pe!ple in his a dience, @eary 9199(; calls the sit ati!n0 in which a pers!n wants t! present di""erent i$pressi!ns t! tw! !r $!re pe!ple in the sa$e enc! nter0 the $ ltiple a dience pr!-le$, One way t! s!lve this pr!-le$ is -y 2eeping a diences apart, 8!""$an 919(9; sed the ter$ a dience segregati!n "!r the tactic -y which an individ al ens res that th!se -e"!re wh!$ he plays !ne !" his parts will n!t -e the sa$e as the !nce t! wh!$ he plays a di""erent part in a di""erent setting, /!wever in practice0 segregating the a dience is !"ten n!t p!ssi-le, F!r e3a$ple in a gr! p sit ati!n0 gr! p $e$-ers !"ten have t! w!r2 t!gether in the sa$e space and ti$e s! that !nly !ne per"!r$ance can -e given t! the wh!le gr! p, #ecreased impact of tactics. +he i$pact !" s!$e tactics is predicted t! -e less in a gr! p than in a !ne*t!*!ne sit ati!n 9@atanI0 19>11 8 erin0 1991;, +! de$!nstrate this p!int0 the distincti!n sh! ld -e $ade -etween sel"*!riented and !ther*!riented tactics 9Schlen2er0 19>01 ?ayne & Ferris0 1990;, +he tactics !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n and e3e$pli"icati!n are n!t e3plicitly targeted at speci"ic !thers - t at creating a general i$pressi!n, ?ith these tactics the act!r wants t! create i$pressi!ns !" c!$petence !r virt e, +! reach these g!als he d!es n!t have t! ai$ his tactic at speci"ic pe!ple in his a dience - t he can $a2e state$ents a-! t hi$sel" !r display -ehavi! r that is in line with these i$pressi!ns, +he tactics !" ingratiati!n and inti$idati!n0 !n the !ther hand0 are !"ten ai$ed at speci"ic targets, +hreats and c!$pli$ents0 "!r e3a$ple0 are generally directed at speci"ic pers!ns, +hey can -e directed at any n $-er !" pe!ple reaching "r!$ !nly !ne pers!n t! the wh!le a dience, /!wever the e""ects are e3pected t! di$inish as the n $-er !" pers!ns0 the tactic ai$s at increases, 8 erin 91991; arg es "!r e3a$ple0 that the c!nseE ences !" threats -ec!$e di"" sed a$!ng di""erent $e$-ers !" a gr! p, I" a threat is directed at a single pers!n0 this pers!n is e3pected t! -ec!$e $!re a"raid than i" the sa$e threat is ttered t! a gr! p !" pe!ple, (ystander effects. &n act!r can target s!$e tactics at a part !" the a dience0 in this way0 $a2ing the !ther pe!ple that are present -ystanders, I" s ch targeted i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics are sed0 they will als! in"l ence the -ystanders which are n!t the$selves the target !" the tactic, &s V!n2 9'00'; de$!nstrated0 the e""ects !n the target !" an ingratiati!n atte$pt are E it di""erent "r!$ the e""ects !n an !-server, +argets !" an ingratiati!n atte$pt "!r$ $!re "av! ra-le j dge$ents !" the ingratiat!r than !-servers d!, One reas!n "!r this is that pe!ple in general see$ t! li2e pe!ple wh! li2e and "latter the$, +his e""ect0 which was already pr!p!sed -y =!nes 91967;0 has -een e3tensively de$!nstrated in the research !n ingratiati!n 98!rd!n0 19961 V!n20 '00'1 ?ayne & Ferris0 199(;, V!n2 9'00'; als! hints that * 6' *
there $ay -e an additi!nal e""ect !n the -ystander, +he eg! !" the !-server $ay -e at sta2e, +he pers!n !-serving an!ther pers!n -eing "lattered $ay "eel resent$ent that the ingratiat!r is n!t "lattering hi$ - t s!$e!ne else, +her"!re0 tactics directed at parts !" an a dience can have e""ects !n the !-servers !" th!se tactics, &n!ther pr!-le$ "!r an act!r "acing an a dience !" $!re than !ne pers!n is that the e""ect !" s!$e sel"*presentati!ns depends !n the niE eness !" the interacti!n -etween the per"!r$er and the a dience, &s 8!""$an 919(9; states it) the pers!nal t! ch $a2es a di""erence in h!w the per"!r$ance is perceived, +his is especially the case with ingratiati!n, I" y! c!$pli$ent s!$e-!dy !n s!$ething0 the e""ect will pr!-a-ly -e red ced i" y! s!$e-!dy else !n the sa$e thing0 while the "irst pers!n is still present, Interaction effects of audience members. +he $e$-ers !" an a dience d!nGt "!r$ their i$pressi!ns !" an act!r in is!lati!n, &s Sheri" 9196(; n!ted0 pe!ple tend t! l!!2 at !thers in !rder t! "!r$ a de"initi!n !" reality, & dience $e$-ers can se cl es !" the !thers present0 li2e c!$$ents !r la ghing0 in the pr!cess !" "!r$ing an i$pressi!n !" an act!r, 5e!pleGs j dge$ents are !"ten in"l enced -y the j dge$ents !" !thers 9Sheri"0 196(1 &sch0 19((;, F!r e3a$ple0 A!sen"eld0 8iacal!ne0 and +edeschi 919>6; de$!nstrated that pe!ple eval ated cart!!ns as $!re " nny when there was a la ghing c!n"ederate present than when they were al!ne !r with a n!n*la ghing c!n"ederate, #ven the $ere presence !" !thers has -een de$!nstrated t! have an e""ect !n h!w i$pressi!ns are "!r$ed !" !thers, +h!$as0 S2it2a0 4hristen0 and = rgena 9'00'; c!nd cted an e3peri$ent !n s!cial "acilitati!n e""ects !" i$pressi!n "!r$ati!n in which they "! nd that participants0 when they were in a gr! p0 j dged a negative e3peri$enter $!re negatively and a p!sitive e3peri$enter $!re p!sitively0 than when they were al!ne, /ence0 when "!r$ing i$pressi!ns !" an act!r0 $e$-ers !" the a dience can -e e3pected t! -e in"l enced -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the a dience, In c!ncl si!n0 $anaging i$pressi!ns "!r a gr! p !" pe!ple $ight reE ire a di""erent appliance !" tactics than $anaging i$pressi!ns "!r a single pers!n, 4reating the i$pressi!n a pers!n wants t! create in !thers already t rned ! t t! -e di""ic lt !n the dyadic level 98!d"rey et al,0 19>6;, On a gr! p level it -ec!$es e3tre$ely c!$plicated, I" an act!r w! ld want t! rati!nally tail!r his sel"*presentati!ns t! the val es !" his a dience0 he sh! ld have 2n!wledge !" the attri- ti!nal styles !" the $e$-ers !" his a dience as well as !" the val e the di""erent $e$-ers assign t! a certain i$pressi!n, F rther$!re0 he sh! ld ta2e int! acc! nt that tactics ai$ed at !ne individ al will als! have e""ects !n the !ther $e$-ers !" the a dience, %eca se !" this c!$ple3ity0 rati!nally c!nsidering all the e""ects !" a sel"*presentati!n tactic will !"ten * 66 * als! c!$pli$ent
-e challenging and s!$eti$es as g!!d as p!ssi-le, &n act!r is there"!re li2ely t! reE ire a l!t !" sel"*reg lat!ry res! rces0 and -eca se !" the li$ited a$! nt !" these res! rces0 $ight n!t -e a-le t! persevere in this 2ind !" sel"*presentati!ns "!r a large a$! nt !" ti$e 9V!hs0 %a $eister0 & 4iar!cc!0 '00(;, &n act!r can there"!re apply di""erent strategies when c!ntr!lling the i$pressi!n he $a2es !n a larger a dience, F!r e3a$ple0 he c! ld ai$ his tactics at speci"ic individ als in the a dience0 while !nly c!ntr!lling "!r negative e""ects !n !ther $e$-ers, & pers!n can0 "!r e3a$ple0 try t! -e seen as li2ea-le -y s!$e c!lleag es while !nly trying n!t t! -e disli2ed -y !thers, Or he can decide that the i$pressi!ns !" !nly a part !" the a dience $atter t! hi$, F!r e3a$ple a child in high sch!!l $ay decide that !nly his class$ates are i$p!rtant t! hi$ and ign!re the i$pressi!ns the teacher "!r$s !" hi$, /e $ight re-el against the teacher in !rder t! earn the respect !" his class$ates, &n!ther strategy c! ld -e0 !nly sing tactics that are generally attri- ted in the sa$e way -y the $e$-ers !" an a dience0 and that are generally val ed p!sitively -y the a dience, &n e3a$ple w! ld -e a lect rer telling a j!2e in his presentati!n, +he j!2e will res lt in that $!st pe!ple will attri- te a sense !" h $! r t! the lect rer at least as l!ng as the j!2e is n!t !""ending t! the$, &nd a sense !" h $! r is generally val ed in the western w!rld, +he si$ilarity !" attri- ti!ns $ade a-! t j!2es and the val e attached t! it -y $!st pe!ple $ight e3plain the large a$! nt !" j!2es that are sed in presentati!ns, B!t $ ch research has -een d!ne yet !n the tactics !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 act!rs apply at a gr! p level, S!0 here lies a challenging "ield !" interest "!r " t re research,
* 67 *
4hapter 6, In"l ence in gr! ps
). Influence in groups
).* #rom a passive to an active influencer Aesearch !n in"l ence in gr! ps has hist!rically ev!lved0 "r!$ c!nsidering the in"l encer as a passive "act!r in the in"l encing pr!cess0 t!wards rec!gni.ing that pe!ple actively in"l ence !thers, +his strea$ !" research $ainly "!c sed at the in"l encee with! t giving $ ch attenti!n t! the characteristics and -ehavi! r !" the in"l encer 9Bg0 '001;, +he "irst the!ries !n gr! p in"l ence dealt with s!cial "acilitati!n0 !r the the!ry a-! t the i$pact !" the $ere presence !" !thers !n per"!r$ance, S!cial "acilitati!n the!ry can -e traced -ac2 t! +riplett0 wh! was the "irst t! de$!nstrate that the $ere presence !" !thers c! ld have a p!wer" l i$pact !n pe!pleGs -ehavi! r 94ran!0 '000;, +riplett 91>9>; de$!nstrated that when !thers were present in a research c!nte3t0 participants w!r2ed harder and "aster than when they were al!ne, In !ne e3peri$ent "!r e3a$ple he sh!wed that children wh! were t!ld t! wind a string !n a "ishing reel as rapidly as p!ssi-le0 w! nd "aster when they w!r2ed t!gether with !thers than when they were al!ne, S -seE ent research h!wever0 de$!nstrated that the presence !" !thers d!es n!t always increases0 - t als! in s!$e cases0 decreases per"!r$ance 9Myers0 '00';, +his led Caj!nc 9196(; t! "!r$ali.e his drive the!ry !" s!cial "acilitati!n, &cc!rding t! this the!ry0 pe!ple "ind the $ere presence !" !thers e$!ti!nally ar! sing, /e then disting ishes -etween d!$inant and n!n*d!$inant resp!nses, H!$inant resp!nses are th!se that are learned and with which s!$e!ne has had c!nsidera-le past e3perience, F!r e3a$ple playing the pian! w! ld -e a d!$inant resp!nse "!r a pr!"essi!nal pian! player, B!n* d!$inant resp!nses are -ehavi! rs0 we havenGt learned and have little e3perience with, ?hen pe!ple are e$!ti!nally ar! sed0 the tendency t!wards d!$inant resp!nses will -e enhanced, there"!re0 the per"!r$ance !" the e3perienced pian! player is e3pected t! -e enhanced in the presence !" an a dience while the per"!r$ance !" a pian! player with! t e3perience is e3pected t! decrease, %eca se this the!ry still ta2es the $ere presence !" !thers as the "act!r that in"l ences -ehavi! r0 it can -e categ!ri.ed as a the!ry !" passive gr! p in"l ence, Sheri" 9196(; gave the in"l encer a little $!re active r!le in his research !n s!cial in"l ence, /e set p an e3peri$ent in which naive s -jects were placed in a dar2 r!!$ with !nly a s$all pinp!int !" light, &"ter "!c sing !n the light "!r s!$e ti$e0 pe!ple c!$e nder the ill si!n that the light appears t! $!ve, S -jects were as2ed t! j dge the distance the light had $!ved, It t rned ! t that participants in"l enced each !ther in their j dge$ents, +his in"l ence was
* 6( *
$!re than the in"l ence !" $ere presence0 -eca se the j dge$ents !" the participants tended t! diverge t!wards the j dge$ents !" the !thers a"ter a n $-er !" trials, +his indicated that they sed !ne an!ther as a $!del "!r reality0 creating a $ t ally accepted resp!nse n!r$, #ven i" they were s -seE ently paired with a new partner they $aintained the resp!nse n!r$ they "!r$ed in the "irst gr! p0 indicating that they had internalised this n!r$, He tsch and 8erard 919((; $ade the distincti!n -etween n!r$ative and in"!r$ati!nal in"l ence, B!r$ative in"l ence ta2es place when pe!ple e3hi-it -ehavi! r that c!n"!r$s with the e3pectati!ns !" !thers in !rder t! av!id rejecti!n !r gain appr!val, In this case the pers!n d!es n!t privately accept the n!r$ - t displays -ehavi! r that $a2es it see$ that he d!es s!, In"!r$ati!nal in"l ence !n the !ther hand0 !cc rs when pe!ple act ally accept evidence a-! t reality "r!$ !thers, In the e3peri$ent !" Sheri"0 the "act that the participants st c2 with the -elie"s they "!r$ed while w!r2ing with their "irst partner even when they were paired with a new partner0 s ggests that in"!r$ati!nal in"l ence t!!2 place, +he "a$! s e3peri$ent !" S!l!$!n &sch 919((; is a g!!d e3a$ple !" the e""ects !" n!r$ative in"l ence, &sch devised a very si$ple tas2 in which participants had t! j dge which !" three presented lines $atched a sti$ l s line, +he tas2 was s! si$ple that s -jects in is!lati!n sc!red per"ectly in $!re than 99 percent !" the trials, /!wever0 in his e3peri$ental c!nditi!n0 s -jects were seated a$!ng a n $-er !" !ther pe!ple wh! acted t! -e s -jects - t in reality were c!n"ederates !" the e3peri$enter, ?hen the !ther s -jects ar! nd hi$ all gave the sa$e wr!ng answer0 the s -jects c!n"!r$ed t! this wr!ng answer0 66,> percent !" the ti$e, S!$e participants wh! went al!ng with the $aj!rity t!ld a"terwards that they s spected that the $aj!rity were FsheepG "!ll!wers !" the "irst resp!ndent !r that the $aj!rity was nder an !ptical ill si!n, /!wever this did n!t "ree the$ "r!$ the in"l ence !" the $aj!rity0 indicating that n!r$ative in"l ence had ta2en place, =anis 91971;0 in his in"l ential article !n gr! pthin20 de$!nstrated the negative e""ects that n!r$ative in"l ence can have !n the e""ective " ncti!ning !" a gr! p, /e analysed gr! ps !" high*level g!vern$ental decisi!n*$a2ers and "! nd that s!$e disastr! s decisi!ns were the res lt !" deteri!rati!n in $ental e""iciency0 reality testing and $!ral j dge$ents as a res lt !" gr! p press re, F!r e3a$ple0 the in*gr! p !" 5resident =!hns!n 2ept -elieving that they c! ld win the escalating Vietna$ war despite !" repeated set-ac2s and "ail res, =anis there"!re intr!d ced the ter$ gr! pthin2 as Fthe $!de !" thin2ing that pers!ns engage in when concurrence-seeking -ec!$es s! d!$inant in a c!hesive ingr! p that it tends t! !verride realistic appraisal !" alternative c! rses !" acti!nG 9=anis0 19710 pp, 67>;, /ence0 n!r$ative
* 66 *
in"l ence can -ec!$e s! str!ng0 especially in a highly c!hesive gr! p0 that the " ncti!ning !" the gr! p can -e drastically i$paired, In c!ntrast t! these the!ries which "!c s !n the in"l ence !" the $aj!rity0 M!sc!vici 919>(; decided t! l!!2 at h!w a $in!rity can in"l ence the $aj!rity, 5e!ple d! n!t !nly passively react t! the gr! p n!r$s - t als!0 n!w and than0 actively try t! in"l ence these n!r$s, M!sc!viciGs $!del is c!ncerned with the "act!rs that a""ect the p!wer !" a $in!rity gr! p t! in"l ence the $aj!rity, +hree $ain "act!rs see$ t! play a r!le, First !" all0 the $in!rity has t! -e c!nsistent1 the !pini!n !r standp!int $ st n!t change and $ st stay sta-le !ver ti$e, Sec!nd0 in"l ence atte$pts $ st appear t! -e -ased !n arg $entati!n and new in"!r$ati!n0 n!t !nly !n rigidly stic2ing t! the standp!int, +hird0 the s!cial c!nte3t plays an i$p!rtant r!le1 i" a $in!rity p!siti!n is -ac2ed p -y general trends in the s!cial envir!n$ent0 it is $!re li2ely t! -e accepted -y the $aj!rity, M!sc!viciGs $!del di""ers "r!$ the $!dels !" $aj!rity in"l ence in that it draws attenti!n t! the characteristics and -ehavi! r !" the in"l encer !n the e""ect !" the in"l ence atte$pts, +he in"l encer is n!t !nly seen as a passive "act!r any$!re - t gets the r!le !" an active act!r,
).+ Structural power and 'ehavioural power In research and the!ri.ing !n the r!le !" the in"l encer in the in"l encing pr!cess0 tw! di""erent lines !" research have ev!lved, On the !ne hand there are the!ries that "!c s !n the sta-le str ct ral aspects !" in"l ence0 !n the !ther hand there are the!ries that direct attenti!n t! the act al -ehavi! r !" the in"l encer 9%rass & % r2hardt0 1996;, %rass and % r2hardt 91996; de"ine str ct re as representing relatively sta-le patterns !" -ehavi! r0 interacti!n0 and interpretati!n that e$erge !ver ti$e and "!r$ predicta-le s!cial reg larities, Str ct ral p!wer lies in the pr!perties !" a s!cial syste$0 rather than in speci"ic -ehavi! r !" the in"l encer, & clear e3a$ple !" str ct ral p!wer is de$!nstrated in an e3peri$ent !" +!rrance 919((;0 in which he drew attenti!n t! the e""ect !" the stat s !" individ als in a gr! p !n the a$! nt !" in"l ence they have within that gr! p, /e st died a three*pers!n crew0 c!nsisting ! t !" a pil!t0 a navigat!r0 and a g nner wh! had t! s!lve s!$e pr!-le$s, /e "! nd0 that i" !ne !" the gr! p $e$-ers 2new the c!rrect answer0 it depended !n the stat s !" that pers!n0 i" the !thers w! ld accept his answer, +he g nners0 when they 2new the c!rrect answer t! the pr!-le$0 c! ld in"l ence the !ther $e$-ers t! accept it !nly in 66 percent !" the cases, +he navigat!rs s cceeded in c!nvincing the !thers !" the c!rrect answer in >0 percent !" the cases and the * 67 *
high stat s pil!ts s cceeded in c!nvincing the !thers in 97 percent !" the cases, +his leads t! the c!ncl si!n that0 the higher the stat s !" a gr! p $e$-er is0 the -igger the chance is that the idea !" the gr! p $e$-er will -e accepted, In line with a str ct ral p!wer perspective0 French and Aaven 919(9; identi"ied "ive -ases !" p!tential p!wer, +hese are0 "irst !" all0 c!ercive p!wer !r the p!wer t! p nish !thers !r ta2e away a val ed g!!d, Sec!ndly reward p!wer0 in which the p!wer h!lder has the a-ility t! -est!w a val ed g!!d !nt! the target pers!n, +he third -ase !" p!wer is legiti$ate p!wer0 which ste$s "r!$ an app!inted !r elected "!r$al p!siti!n, +he "! rth is re"erent p!wer which !riginates "r!$ the target pers!n -eing attracted t! the p!wer h!lder !r wanting t! -e li2e hi$, +he last -ase is e3pert p!wer which ste$s "r!$ the val ed special s2ills !r a-ilities a pers!n has relative t! !thers, & str ct ral view !" p!wer "!c ses !n the sta-le nderlying aspects !" in"l ence, In c!ntrast0 a -ehavi! ral view l!!2s at the tactics individ als se in !rder t! in"l ence !thers, +his part !" in"l ence research has -een st died $ainly thr! gh the devel!p$ent !" in"l ence E esti!nnaires 9:ipnis et al,0 19>01 D 2l & Fal-e0 19901 Schrieshei$ & /in2in0 1990;, +hese are sel"*rep!rt E esti!nnaires0 !n which resp!ndents "ill in h!w !"ten they se certain in"l ence tactics, F!r e3a$ple0 !n the E esti!nnaire !" Schrieshei$ and /in2in 91990;0 resp!ndents are as2ed t! indicate h!w !"ten they se the tactics !") e3change0 ingratiati!n0 rati!nality0 assertiveness0 pward appeal0 and c!aliti!ns, Str ct ral p!wer and -ehavi! ral p!wer are n! distinct c!ncepts 9%rass & % r2hard0 1996;, Str ct re arises "r!$ the acti!ns !" pe!ple1 pe!ple can se several -ehavi! r techniE es t! c!ntr!l the str ct re that arises in a gr! p, F!r e3a$ple0 a gr! p $e$-er can $a2e se !" several tactics in !rder t! -ec!$e accepted as the gr! p leader, +he acti!ns !" pe!ple in t rn0 are als! shaped -y the nderlying str ct re, F!r e3a$ple0 the a$! nt !" c!ercive and reward p!wer that a pers!n can se will depend !n the pers!ns a-ility t! -est!w rewards !r p nish$ents !n !thers which will depend !n his str ct ral p!wer p!siti!n,
).) %he development of structural aspects of influence +he research !" +!rrance 919((; de$!nstrates the str ct ral aspects !" in"l ence0 - t n!t h!w s ch str ct re c!$es a-! t in a gr! p, %ales 919(6; researched newly "!r$ed gr! ps c!nsisting ! t !" nacE ainted pers!ns with si$ilar -ac2gr! nds, /e "! nd that p!wer di""erentiati!ns within th!se gr! ps c!rresp!nded with h!w $ ch the di""erent $e$-ers !" * 6> *
the gr! p tal2ed, +he $e$-ers0 wh! tal2ed $!re0 were $!re li2ely t! e$erge as gr! p leaders than th!se wh! tal2ed less, Several the!ries try t! e3plain h!w nstr ct red gr! ps devel!p sta-le patterns !" -ehavi! r0 interacti!n0 and interpretati!n !ver ti$e, S!$e evidence indicates that gr! p str ct res can devel!p E ic2ly a"ter a gr! p has "!r$ed, A!sa and Ma. r 91979; de$!nstrated that stat s hierarchies can devel!p rapidly in a gr! p !" pe!ple, +hey "! nd that eye glancing -ehavi! r at the initial $eeting !" the gr! p $e$-ers was a g!!d predict!r !" stat s hierarchies d ring interacti!ns, @i"ecycle the!ries have -een devel!ped that p!sit that gr! ps pass thr! gh a n $-er !" stages characteri.ed -y di""erent str ct ral patterns, &cc!rding t! these $!dels0 the seE ence !" stages "!ll!ws "r!$ an internal drive within the gr! p that $a2es it pass "r!$ !ne stage t! an!ther 9&rr!w0 19971 + c2$an0 196(1 Ae$$erswaal0 199>;, +he $!st "a$! s li"ecycle the!ry is pr!-a-ly + c2$anGs 9196(; gr! p li"ecycle $!del, +his $!del c!ntains "! r stages that gr! ps g! tr! gh in their devel!p$ent, Ba$ely) "!r$ing0 st!r$ing0 n!r$ing0 per"!r$ing0 and adj! rning, In the "irst tw! stages0 the str ct re !" the gr! p is still "l id and nsta-le0 in the n!r$ing stage str ct ral patterns -ec!$e increasingly sta-le and at the end !" the n!r$ing stage it reaches its de"inite "!r$, It will 2eep this str ct re d ring the per"!r$ing stage while c!$pleting its tas2s0 ntil the gr! p is dis-anded in the adj! rning stage, +his li"e*cycle the!ry !" str ct re devel!p$ent has -een challenged -y n!n*seE ential the!ries !" gr! p*devel!p$ent 9&rr!w0 1997;, @i"e*cycle the!ries ass $e that the str ct ral devel!p$ent !" a gr! p is ca sed -y "!rces internal t! the gr! p, Aesearchers !" n!n* seE ential gr! p devel!p$ent have drawn attenti!n t! e3ternal ca ses that $ight in"l ence gr! p*str ct re, 4hanges in "!r e3a$ple the tas2 !r techn!l!gical envir!n$ent are e3pected t! have an i$pact !n the gr! p devel!p$ent path, F!r e3a$ple0 8ersic2 919>>; "! nd evidence "!r a p nct ated eE ili-ri $ $!del in which peri!ds !" relative sta-ility are alternated with rev!l ti!nary change triggered -y the $e$-erGs awareness !" ti$e and deadlines,
)., %he effect of impressions on structural development within a group &cc!rding t! e3pectati!n states the!ry 9%erger et al,0 1977;0 when pe!ple "irst c!$e t!gether t! "!r$ a gr! p0 $e$-ers se easily !-serva-le characteristics as cl es "!r esta-lishing the initial relati!nships that $a2e p the gr! p str ct re, On the -asis !" these cl es0 the gr! p * 69 *
$e$-ers devel!p e3pectati!ns a-! t the a-ilities !" the !ther pe!ple in the gr! p t! c!ntri- te t! the gr! p g!als, 5!sitive e3pectati!ns relative t! !ther gr! p $e$-ers are e3pected t! end!w the $e$-ers $!re !pp!rt nities t! $a2e c!ntri- ti!ns t! the gr! p tas20 receive p!sitive eval ati!ns0 and in"l ence gr! p decisi!ns 9de 8ilder0 1991;, S!0 e3pectati!n states the!ry predicts that in a newly "!r$ed gr! p !" pe!ple0 a stat s*!rgani.ing pr!cess will ta2e place in which the $e$-ers se !-serva-le characteristics as cl es "!r "!r$ing per"!r$ance e3pectati!ns !" the !ther $e$-ers, On the -asis !" these per"!r$ance e3pectati!ns a stat s hierarchy will -e "!r$ed, &cc!rding t! this the!ry0 the c!$petence !" a gr! p*$e$-er will -e derived "r!$ either di"" se !r speci"ic stat s characteristics, Hi"" se characteristics are characteristics that are c lt rally ass!ciated with high !r l!w a-ility and are n!t partic larly related t! a certain tas20 e3a$ples are race and gender, Speci"ic characteristics are characteristics that are related t! the gr! p tas2 9de 8ilder0 1991;, +he the!ry predicts that the $!re relevant the characteristic is "!r the tas2 at hand0 the $!re pr!"! nd will -e its e""ect !n the interacti!n patterns, /!wever0 this d!es n!t always h!ld, It has -een de$!nstrated that di"" se characteristics can als! have an i$pact !n "!r$ed e3pectati!ns, F!r e3a$ple0 $en are generally j dged $!re c!$petent than w!$en and are $!re !"ten elected as leaders 9#agly & :ara 0 1991;, &ls!0 the characteristic !" $ilitary stat s was sh!wn -y +!rrance t! have an in"l ence !n e3pectati!ns even th! gh it was n!t relevant "!r the tas2 at hand, +his indicates that the "!r$ing !" in"l ence patterns within a gr! p is n!t always -ased !n rati!nal c!nsiderati!ns !" reaching !pti$al gr! p ! tc!$es, 8r! p $e$-ers se a variety !" c es t! assess their c!*w!r2ers, %eca se i$pressi!n $anage$ent deals with c!ntr!lling the c es a pers!n gives !"" t! !thers0 it is e3pected t! have an in"l ence !n the str ct ral devel!p$ent !" a gr! p,
* 70 *
4hapter 7, /yp!theses
,. ./potheses
+here are several $!tives pe!ple can have t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent 9@eary & :!wals2i0 19901 Schlen2er0 199';, +hese can -e $!tives !" sel"*estee$0 devel!p$ent !" desired identities0 !r $a3i$i.ati!n !" reward*c!st rati!s in s!cial sit ati!ns, B! $atter what the partic lar $!tive is0 =!nes and 5itt$an 919>'; state that $!st0 i" n!t all the reas!ns t! engage in sel"*presentati!n can -e s -s $ed nder an interest in a g$enting !r $aintaining !neGs p!wer in relati!nships, %y in"l encing the i$pressi!ns !thers "!r$ !" hi$0 an act!r can in"l ence the -ehavi! rs !" th!se !thers, 8angestad and Snyder 9'000; write that alth! gh their revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale d!es n!t c!ntain e3plicit ite$s !n $!tives t! engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 they e3pect that it is related t! stat s*!riented i$pressi!n $anage$ent $!tives, +hey e3pect that pe!ple sc!ring high !n this scale0 $ay atte$pt t! c ltivate p -lic i$ages that create appearances that represent s!cial stat s, +h!se high*sc!rers !n the sel"*$!nit!ring scale $ay strive t! c!nstr ct s!cial w!rlds that " ncti!n as e""ective instr $ents !" stat s enhance$ents, S!0 when they are engaged in s!cial interacti!ns they can -e e3pected t! se their i$pressi!n $anage$ent s2ills t! gain in"l ence and stat s !n the pe!ple they interact with, In acc!rdance with this view :ild "" and Hay 91997; "! nd that high sel"*$!nit!rs !-tained $!re pr!$!ti!ns than l!w sel"*$!nit!rs and several researchers "! nd that high sel"*$!nit!rs are $!re li2ely t! e$erge as gr! p leaders than d! l!w sel"*$!nit!rs 9:ent & M!ss0 19901 Caccar!0 F!ti0 & :enny0 19911 :!l-0 199>;, +he sel"*$!nit!ring scale c!ntains -!th ite$s related t! the tendency t! engage in sel"* presentati!ns0 as ite$s !n a pers!nGs a-ility t! c!ntr!l e3pressive -ehavi! rs 9Snyder & 8angestad0 19>6;, S!0 it d!es n!t !nly $eas re the "reE ency in which a pers!n engages in sel"*presentati!nal -ehavi! r - t als! the s ccess the pers!n is e3pected t! have in reaching intended ! tc!$es, +he research !" + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; see$s t! s pp!rt the view that sel"*$!nit!ring is related t! s ccess" l acE isitive sel"*presentati!ns, %eca se the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale see$s t! $eas re the tendency !" a pers!n t! engage in and -e s ccess" l in sel"*presentati!ns ai$ed at increasing his s!cial stat s0 sc!res !n this scale are e3pected t! -e p!sitively related with the a$! nt !" in"l ence a pers!n has in gr! p decisi!ns, *+: "cores of a group member on the revised self-monitoring scale will be positively related with the influence of that member on group decisions.
* 71 *
%eca se the sel"*$!nit!ring scale c!ntains ite$s !n the tendency !" individ als t! engage in sel"*presentati!ns 9Snyder & 8angestad0 19>6;0 individ als sc!ring high !n this $eas re are als! e3pected t! sc!re high !n $eas res !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics, A!sen"eld et al, 9199(; there"!re c!nsidered the scale t! -e a scale !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent, M!re!ver0 %!lin! and + rnley 9'006; de$!nstrated that high sel"*$!nit!rs have a tendency t! apply p!sitive i$pressi!n $anage$ent techniE es0 ai$ed at creating a "av! ra-le i$age, &s the tactics !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n are c!nsidered p!sitive i$pressi!n $anage$ent techniE es0 they are e3pected t! -e p!sitively related t! sel"*$!nit!ring, *,: "cores of a group member on the revised self-monitoring scale will be positively related with scores on the ingratiation and self-promotion scale.
Several researchers have de$!nstrated that there e3ists a p!sitive relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and the targetGs li2ing "!r the ingratiat!r 9=!nes0 19671 8!d"rey et al,0 19>61 ?ayne & @iden0 199(1 8!rd!n0 19961 + rnley & %!lin!0 '0011 V!n20 '00'1 /iggins et al,0 '006;, O" these researches0 !nly the research !" + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; $eas red ingratiati!n tactics sed in a gr! p, /!wever0 even they sed a dyadic appr!ach t! $eas re i$pressi!n $anage$ent ! tc!$es, Other researches $ainly investigated the e""ects !" ingratiati!n !n a dyadic level, %eca se ingratiati!n is !"ten targeted at speci"ic individ als0 and n!t at a gr! p as a wh!le0 it is e3pected that higher levels !" s2ill !n the part !" the act!r are necessary t! create "av! ra-le i$pressi!ns !n a gr! p level, Hi""erent $e$-ers !" the a dience can have di""erent attri- ti!nal styles0 val es0 and e3pectati!ns, F rther$!re i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics are e3pected t! -e less e""ective !n a gr! p level than !n a dyadic level0 and -ystander e""ects are li2ely t! !cc r, +here"!re0 deli-erately creating an i$pressi!n !" li2ing in a gr! p sit ati!n can -e e3pected t! -e $!re di""ic lt than in a dyadic sit ati!n, + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; did n!t "ind a signi"icant direct c!rrelati!n -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing !n a gr! p level, /!wever0 they "! nd a signi"icant negative c!rrelati!n !" *,'' "!r l!w sel"*$!nit!rs and a signi"icant p!sitive c!rrelati!n !" ,'6 "!r high sel"*$!nit!rs -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing, +he "act that they did n!t "ind a direct res lt indicates that ingratiati!n
* 7' *
$ay reE ire $!re s2ill at a gr! p level than at a dyadic level, F rther$!re0 the di""erence in the s ccess !" the ! tc!$es "!r l!w and high sel"*$!nit!rs indicate that sel"*$!nit!ring t rned ! t t! -e a g!!d predict!r "!r these ingratiati!n s2ills, +here"!re it is predicted that sel"*$!nit!ring " ncti!ns as a $!derat!r !n the relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing, *-: &here will be a positive relation between ingratiation and liking on a group level. *.: "elf-monitoring will work as a moderator with a positive effect on the relation between ingratiation and liking on a group level.
+he relati!nship -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence has t rned ! t t! -e E ite a$-ig ! s, /iggins et al, 9'006; "! nd !nly a very wea2 e""ect !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n !n per"!r$ance assess$ents in a $eta*analysis, Several researchers "! nd n!n*signi"icant !r negative ! tc!$es "!r sel"*pr!$!ti!n 98!d"rey et al,0 19>61 ?ayne & Ferris0 19901 ?ayne & @iden0 199(;, /!wever0 li2e with ingratiati!n0 reaching s ccess" l ! tc!$es !" sel"* pr!$!ti!n $ay str!ngly depend !n the i$pressi!n $anage$ent s2ills !" the act!r, 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; !-served that s ccess" l sel"*pr!$!ters see$ t! -e $!re Fnat ral0 $!re at h!$e with the tactics they sedG, + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; did n!t "ind a signi"icant direct c!rrelati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence !n a gr! p level, Beither did they "ind a signi"icant c!rrelati!n "!r l!w sel"*$!nit!rs0 - t they "! nd a signi"icant c!rrelati!n !" ,'9 "!r high sel"*$!nit!rs -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and c!$petence, +he "act that n! signi"icant ! tc!$e was "! nd "!r l!w sel"*$!nit!rs and a signi"icant ! tc!$e was "! nd "!r high sel"*$!nit!rs indicates that sel"*$!nit!ring can -e a g!!d predict!r "!r sel"*pr!$!ti!n s2ills, +here"!re it is predicted that sel"*$!nit!ring " ncti!ns as a $!derat!r !n the relati!nship -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence, */: &here will be a positive relation between self-promotion and perceived competence on a group level. *0: "elf-monitoring will work as a moderator with a positive effect on the relation between self-promotion and perceived competence on a group level.
* 76 *
In the literat re !n in"l ence tactics 9:ipnis et al,0 19>01 D 2l & Fal-e0 19901 D 2l & +racey0 199';0 ingratiati!n is seen as !ne !" the $ay!r in"l ence tactics that are sed in !rgani.ati!ns, +he reas!ning -ehind this is that a pers!n can se ingratiati!n t! get his target in a g!!d $!!d !r thin2 "av! ra-le !" hi$0 s! that the target will -e inclined t! c!$ply with a reE est, D 2l and +racey 9199'; "! nd that the e""ects !" ingratiati!n were $!derately e""ective "!r in"l encing s -!rdinates and peers, %eca se ingratiati!n is an i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic ai$ed at creating an i$age !" li2ea-le0 its e""ect !n in"l ence is e3pected t! -e $ediated -y li2ening, 4!nseE ently li2ing is e3pected t! -e ass!ciated with in"l ence, =!nes 91967; already n!ticed that a gain in attractiveness indicates an enhanced a-ility t! c!ntr!l a target pers!n, +his is als! predicted -y the c!ncept !" re"erent p!wer !" French and Aaven 919(9;, +his c!ncept states that i" pers!n & is attracted t!wards pers!n %0 pers!n % has a str ct ral s! rce !" p!wer !ver pers!n &, ?hen pe!ple are li2ed -y !thers0 the !pti!ns !" th!se !thers t! p nish and c!ntr!l the$ are li$ited 9A!sen"eld et al,0 199(;, On a gr! p level0 li2ing can a""ect the a-ility !" a gr! p $e$-er t! gain c!!perati!n and agree$ent "r!$ !thers as well as the a-ility !" gr! p $e$-ers t! "!r$ c!aliti!ns with !thers, +his is in line with the research "indings !" 4arli0 @aFle r0 & @!e-er 9199(; that li2ea-leness is a predictive "act!r "!r in"l ence, +here"!re it is hyp!thesised that the $!re a pers!n ses ingratiati!n within a gr! p0 the $!re in"l ence that pers!n has within that gr! p and this relati!nship is e3pected t! -e $ediated -y li2ing, *1: &here will be a positive relation between ingratiation and influence in a group. *2: &here will be a positive relation between liking on a group level and influence in that group. *3: 4iking on a group level will function as a mediator with a positive effect in the relation between ingratiation and influence in a group.
8r! p $e$-ers can se i$pressi!ns $anage$ent tactics t! create i$pressi!ns !" c!$petence in !thers directly -y $eans !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 - t they can als! -e created indirectly -y
* 77 *
$eans !" ingratiati!n, 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; "! nd that i" s -jects were a-le t! increase li2ing -y a target0 perceived c!$petence was als! increased, F rther$!re0 pe!ple are $!re inclined t! attri- te s ccesses and p!sitive events internally "!r pe!ple they li2e while they are $!re inclined t! attri- te the sa$e acts t! e3ternal ca ses "!r pe!ple they disli2e 9&vis!n0 19>0;, /ence0 li2ing "!r a gr! p $e$-er is e3pected t! -e p!sitively related t! perceived c!$petence !" that gr! p $e$-er, *+5: &here will be a positive relation between liking on a group level and perceived competence on that group level.
#3pectati!n states the!ry predicts that) the stat s a gr! p $e$-er will have in a gr! p0 is e3pected t! -e p!sitively related with the e3pectati!ns !" the !ther gr! p $e$-ers a-! t the a-ilities !" that pers!n t! c!ntri- te t! the gr! p g!als, Stat s characteristics are sed as cl es "!r "!r$ing these per"!r$ance e3pectati!ns 9%erger et al,0 19771 de 8ilder0 1991;, 4!$-ining this the!ry with i$pressi!n $anage$ent the!ry0 !ne w! ld predict that the a$! nt !" in"l ence a gr! p $e$-er has in a gr! p will -e in"l enced -y the i$pressi!ns !" c!$petence he is a-le t! give !"" t! his gr! p $e$-ers, In s $0 acc!rding t! this the!ry0 as "ar as a gr! p $e$-er is a-le t! c!ntr!l the cl es he gives !"" within a gr! p0 he is a-le t! c!ntr!l his a$! nt !" in"l ence within that gr! p, In a gr! p tas2 in which the $e$-ers are tas2 !riented and the gr! p ! tc!$e is i$p!rtant t! the$0 it is in the -est interest !" each $e$-er t! search "!r in"!r$ati!n regarding the capa-ilities !" the !ther $e$-ers, I" !ne $e$-er perceives an!ther $e$-er t! -e $!re capa-le at a certain tas20 he is e3pected t! accept in"l ence "r!$ this !ther pers!n -eca se gr! p per"!r$ance is e3pected t! -e highest i" the $!st capa-le gr! p $e$-ers have the $!st in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, %!nner 9'007; "! nd in a la-!rat!ry e3peri$ent0 that the gr! p $e$-er0 wh! was rec!gni.ed as having the highest e3pertise in s!lving a pr!-le$0 had twice the a$! nt !" in"l ence as the !ther gr! p $e$-ers, +his is als! in line with the "indings !" 4arli et al, 9199(; that perceived c!$petence is a predictive "act!r "!r in"l ence, In the st dy !" %!nner0 in"!r$ati!n !n the c!$petence !" the di""erent gr! p $e$-ers was $ade availa-le t! the s -jects, In $!st real li"e sit ati!ns0 h!wever0 assessing the c!$petence !" c!*w!r2ers at a certain tas2 is a di""ic lt pr!cess, Aesearch res lts !n peerGs a-ilities t! assess the c!$petence !" their c!*w!r2ers have -een $i3ed, On the !ne hand0 it has -een
* 7( *
clai$ed that peer eval ati!ns can -e relia-le indicat!rs !" individ al per"!r$ances in the " t re 9:ane & @awler0 197>;, On the !ther hand0 s!$e researches have sh!wn that gr! p $e$-ers are n!t always a-le t! identi"y the -est per"!r$er in their gr! p 9@i--y0 +r!t$an0 & Ci$$er0 19>71 @ittlepage0 Sch$idt0 ?hisler0 & Fr!st0 199(;, S!0 the e3pertise p!wer identi"ied -y French and Aaven 919(9; can s!$eti$es -e -ased !n i$pressi!ns !" e3pertise !r c!$petence instead !" real !-jective c!$petence, +here"!re it is hyp!thesised that sel"* pr!$!ti!n will a""ect the level !" in"l ence a pers!n has within a gr! p, *++: &here will be a positive relation between self-promotion and influence in a group. *+,: &here will be a positive relation between perceived competence in a group and influence in that group. *+-: 6erceived competence will function as a mediator with a positive effect in the relation between self-promotion and influence in a group.
,.* Model +! give a clear !verview !" the predicti!ns $ade in the hyp!theses0 $!del 7,1 de$!nstrates the lin2ages -etween the di""erent varia-les and their e3pected directi!ns, +he relati!ns are all e3pected t! -e p!sitive and there"!re the hyp!theses carry the FJG sign, In additi!n t! the stated hyp!theses and t! answer the $ain E esti!n !" this research0 F#o impression management tactics affect the amount of influence a group member has in a group78, an additi!nal regressi!n analysis will -e r n t! investigate the a$! nt !" in"l ence that can -e e3plained -y the independent varia-les,
Model ,.* 2elations 'etween the varia'les as tested '/ the h/potheses
* 76 *
/7 J
Ingratiati!n /' J
/6 J
/9 J 9Med,; @i2ing /> J
/7 J Sel"* $!nit!ring /' J Sel"* pr!$!ti!n /6 J /1 J
/10 J In"l ence
/1' J 5erceived c!$petence /16 J 9Med,;
/( J
/11 J
* 77 *
4hapter (, Meth!ds
-. Methods
-.* Sample +his st dy c!nsisted ! t !" tw! gr! ps !" participants, One gr! p !" '( "irst year st dents "!ll!wing the st dy !" +echnical % siness Manage$ent at the /!gesch!!l C yd and a gr! p !" 71 st dents !" the st dy !" :n!wledge #ngineering at the University !" Maastricht, +he st dents were selected -eca se they had w!r2ed intensively in pr!ject gr! ps0 ranging "r!$ 7 t! 6 st dents, +he grade the st dents received "!r the pr!jects depended !n the ! tc!$e !" the pr!jects which was s -$itted in the "!r$ !" a paper and a "inal presentati!n, +he "inal grades were eE al "!r all the $e$-ers !" a pr!ject gr! p, H ring the -l!c20 ti$e and l!cati!n was reserved s! that the st dents c! ld w!r2 with their gr! ps !n the pr!ject, +here was n! pri!r hierarchical str ct re i$p!sed !n the gr! ps0 h!wever0 the st dents were enc! raged t! app!int gr! p r!les, In !rder t! c!$plete the pr!ject0 st dents had t! w!r2 t!gether intensively and divide the w!r2 !" the pr!ject a$!ng the$, +he gr! ps c! ld there"!re -e de"ined as pr!ject tea$s in the de"initi!n !" 4!hen and %ailey 91997;, +he $ean age !" the resp!ndents was '0,7 years with a $ini$ $ !" 17 and a $a3i$ $ !" '>, +he $aj!rity !" the participants were $ale0 !nly 6 were "e$ale, (6 !" the resp!ndents were !" H tch !rigin0 while 11 were n!n*H tch, 5articipants "r!$ the st dy !" +echnical % siness Manage$ent w!r2ed !n a pr!ject in which they had t! eval ate and i$pr!ve the syste$ that was sed t! c!$$ nicate grades t! st dents, +he pr!ject c!nsisted ! t !" a E antitative research0 and the design !" a c!$$ nicati!n syste$, +he res lts !" the research and the rati!nale -ehind the syste$ were e3plained in a paper and presented at the end !" the pr!ject, +he pr!jects t!!2 place in a ti$e span !" 10 wee2s, 5articipants "r!$ the st dy !" :n!wledge #ngineering at the University !" Maastricht w!r2ed !n an !pti$ali.ati!n pr!-le$ "!r which they had t! - ild a c!$p ter pr!gra$ si$ lating a l!gistical pr!-le$, +hey had t! write d!wn their pr!ceedings0 ! tc!$es0 and rati!nale -ehind their decisi!ns in a paper and present this at the end !" the pr!ject, +he pr!ject t!!2 place in a ti$e span !" 1' wee2s,
* 7> *
4hapter (, Meth!ds
-.+ Method of data collection &t the end !" the pr!ject0 st dents were as2ed t! "ill in a E esti!nnaire c!ntaining general de$!graphical E esti!ns0 E esti!ns a-! t their i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 and E esti!ns a-! t the i$pressi!ns they had !" their gr! p $e$-ers, +he E esti!nnaires were handed t! the st dents -y their teachers and they were as2ed t! "ill the$ in privately with! t disc ssing the$ with their c!*w!r2ers, +hey were t!ld that i" they had any E esti!n c!ncerning the E esti!nnaire0 they c! ld as2 it t! the researcher, &"ter they "illed in the E esti!nnaires0 they c! ld hand the$ in t! the researcher, St dents wh! hadnGt "illed in the E esti!nnaire yet were given the p!ssi-ility t! "ill in the sa$e E esti!nnaire in an !n*line "!r$, It was g aranteed t! the st dents0 ver-ally as well as in the written intr!d cti!n t! the E esti!nnaire0 that the data !" the E esti!nnaires w! ld -e treated c!n"identially, St dentsG participati!n in the gr! p pr!jects was a $andat!ry reE ire$ent "!r their st dy0 h!wever0 participati!n in this research was v!l ntary,
-.) Aperationalization of concepts measured "elf-monitoring was $eas red sing the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale !" Snyder and
8angestad 919>6; c!nsisting ! t !" 1> ite$s, +he scale was revised "r!$ SnyderGs 91977; '( ite$ sel"*$!nit!ring scale0 s! that the 7 ite$s that l!aded less than 0,1( !n the general "act!r were dr!pped "r!$ the scale, Aesp!ndents were as2ed t! indicate h!w $ ch they agreed with a state$ent a-! t the$selves !n a ( p!int scale ranging "r!$ Kt!tally disagreeL t! Kt!tally agreeL, +w! slight adj st$ents were $ade t! the scale in !rder t! $a2e it $!re nderstanda-le "!r the st dents) In ite$ 7 the w!rd Fi$pr!$pt G was changed int! FinstantG and in ite$ 16 FcharadesG was changed int! Fw!rd g essing ga$esG, +his was d!ne -eca se a pil!t st dy de$!nstrated that n!t all st dents see$ t! -e "a$iliar with these w!rds, 4r!n-achGs "!r the test was 0,7', Fact!r analysis did n!t s pp!rt the tw! "act!r str ct re pr!p!sed -y 8angestad and Snyder 9'000;1 6 "act!rs had an eigenval e higher than 1 and the "irst tw! "act!rs t!gether !nly e3plained 66 percent !" the variance, 4!nseE ently0 the scale was ta2en t! $eas re !nly the nderlying c!ncept !" sel"*$!nit!ring and n!t the pr!p!sed separate c!$p!nents !" e3pressive c!ntr!l and s!cial stage presence,
* 79 *
4hapter (, Meth!ds
Ingratiation was $eas red0 sing the 7 ingratiati!n ite$s !" the i$pressi!n $anage$ent scale !" %!lin! and + rnley 9'006;, +his scale was designed and e3tensively tested 9%!lin! & + rnley0 1999; t! $eas re the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics identi"ied -y =!nes and 5itt$an 919>';, Aesp!ndents were as2ed h!w acc rate state$ents were in descri-ing their -ehavi! r d ring the gr! p pr!ject, +hey c! ld indicate their answer !n a ( p!int scale0 ranging "r!$ Kvery inacc rateL t! Kvery acc rateL, 4r!n-achGs "!r the test was 0,6>, "elf-promotion was $eas red0 sing the 7 sel"*pr!$!ti!n ite$s !" the i$pressi!n
$anage$ent scale !" %!lin! and + rnley 9'006;, +his scale was devised and e3tensively tested 9%!lin! & + rnley0 1999; t! $eas re the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics identi"ied -y =!nes and 5itt$an 919>';, Aesp!ndents were as2ed h!w acc rate state$ents were in descri-ing their -ehavi! r d ring the gr! p pr!ject, +hey c! ld indicate their answer !n a ( p!int scale0 ranging "r!$ Kvery inacc rateL t! Kvery acc rateL, 4r!n-achGs "!r the test was 0,(70 which $a2es the relia-ility !" this scale critical and there"!re " rther res lts incl ding this scale sh! ld -e treated with ca ti!n, 6erceptions of competence !" a gr! p $e$-er were $eas red -y ' E esti!ns answered -y the c!*w!r2ers !" the individ al, Aesp!ndents were as2ed t! indicate !n a ( p!int scale0 ranging "r!$ Kt!tally disagreeL t! Kt!tally agreeL0 h!w $ ch they agreed with state$ents a-! t their gr! p $e$-ers, +he ite$s c!rrelated 0,77 with each !ther, +he $ean !" the ' E esti!ns !n each varia-le was ta2en t! $eas re the perceived c!$petence !" a gr! p $e$-er, +he $ean !" all the gr! p $e$-ers wh! answered E esti!ns a-! t a c!*w!r2er was ta2en t! $eas re percepti!ns !" c!$petence !n a gr! p level, S!0 this varia-le was $eas red -y tw! ite$s "!r every gr! p $e$-er wh! rated the individ al, & participant was !nly incl ded int! the sa$ple i" he had -een rated -y at least (0M !" his gr! p $e$-ers, %eca se !" this reE ire$ent0 ' resp!ndents were e3cl ded "r!$ the analysis, 4iking !" a gr! p $e$-er was $eas red -y ' E esti!ns answered -y the c!*w!r2ers !" the individ al, Aesp!ndents were as2ed t! indicate !n a ( p!int scale0 ranging "r!$ Kt!tally disagreeL t! Kt!tally agreeL0 h!w $ ch they agreed with state$ents a-! t their gr! p $e$-ers, +he ite$s c!rrelated 0,67 with each !ther, +he $ean !" the ' E esti!ns !n each varia-le was ta2en t! $eas re a pers!nGs @i2ing !" a gr! p $e$-er, +he $ean !" all the gr! p $e$-ers wh! answered E esti!ns a-! t a c!*w!r2er was ta2en t! $eas re li2ing !" a
* (0 *
4hapter (, Meth!ds
gr! p level, S!0 this varia-le was $eas red -y tw! ite$s "!r every gr! p $e$-er wh! rated the individ al, & participant was !nly incl ded int! the sa$ple i" he had -een rated -y at least (0M !" his gr! p $e$-ers, %eca se !" this reE ire$ent0 ' resp!ndents were e3cl ded "r!$ the analysis, Influence was $eas red -y ' E esti!ns answered -y the c!*w!r2ers !" the individ al, Aesp!ndents were as2ed t! indicate !n a ( p!int scale0 ranging "r!$ Kt!tally disagreeL t! Kt!tally agreeL0 h!w $ ch they agreed with state$ents a-! t their gr! p $e$-ers, +he ite$s c!rrelated 0,76 with each !ther, +he $ean !" the ' E esti!ns !n each varia-le was ta2en t! $eas re a pers!nGs i$pressi!n !" a gr! p $e$-er, +he $ean !" all the gr! p $e$-ers wh! answered E esti!ns a-! t a c!*w!r2er was ta2en t! $eas re in"l ence, S!0 that this varia-le was $eas red -y tw! ite$s "!r every gr! p $e$-er wh! rated the individ al, & participant was !nly incl ded int! the sa$ple i" he had -een rated -y at least (0M !" his gr! p $e$-ers, %eca se !" this reE ire$ent0 ' resp!ndents were e3cl ded "r!$ the analysis,
-., Inter!$udge relia'ilit/ of peer assessments %eca se the varia-le Fin"l enceG relates t! an !-jective c!ncept1 that is t! say0 the in"l ence a pers!n has in reality0 the c!nsistency in ratings -y peers !n this c!ncept is e3pected t! -e higher than the c!nsistency "!r Fli2ingG and Fperceived c!$petenceG, F rther$!re the c!nsistency in answers "!r Fperceived c!$petenceG is e3pected t! -e higher than the c!nsistency "!r Fli2ingG -eca se the latter re"ers t! a s -jective attit de t!wards a pers!n while Fperceived c!$petenceG relates t! a pers!nGs esti$ati!n !" real c!$petence !" a gr! p $e$-er, +! $eas re the inter*j dge relia-ility !" the peer assess$ent $eas res0 4r!n-achGs Gs !n li2ing0 c!$petence0 and in"l ence was $eas red "!r the '' cases in which a resp!ndent was assessed -y e3actly 7 gr! p $e$-ers, +hese cases were ch!sen -eca se the n $-er !" gr! p $e$-ers that assessed a resp!ndent di""ered and the n $-er !" ite$s has t! -e eE al t! -e a-le t! calc late the 4r!n-achGs , Inter*j dge relia-ility "!r li2ing was N 0,7'0 "!r c!$petence N 0,>60 and "!r in"l ence N 0,91, +hese ! tc!$es s pp!rt the view that in"l ence can -e seen as a relatively !-jective $eas re as gr! p $e$-ers see$ t! agree !n the a$! nt !" in"l ence their c! w!r2ers have, F rther$!re0 li2ing0 as e3pected0 see$s t! -e
* (1 *
4hapter (, Meth!ds
$!re s -jective than perceived c!$petence as it has a higher , +hese ! tc!$es see$ t! give s!$e evidence that the scales sed see$ t! $eas re the c!ncepts they were s pp!sed t! $eas re,
* (' *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
1. 2esults
1.* Descriptive statistics +a-les !" c!rrelates0 $eans and standard deviati!ns0 "!r the tw! sa$ples separately as well as the j!ined sa$ple0 are sed t! de$!nstrate the -asic statistics, Bati!nality is c!ded as a d $$y varia-le with a F0G "!r pers!ns with the H tch nati!nality and a F1G "!r pers!ns with a nati!nality !ther than H tch, 8ender is c!ded as a d $$y varia-le with a F0G "!r $ale and F1G "!r "e$ale, +a-le 6,10 6,' and 6,6 display the $eans and standard deviati!ns !" the varia-les and their c!rrelati!ns "!r respectively) +he :n!wledge #ngineering sa$ple0 the /!gesch!!l C yd sa$ple0 and the c!$plete sa$ple in which the tw! previ! sly $enti!ned sa$ples have -een j!ined t!gether,
%a'le 1.* "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the 3nowledge ngineering sample S.d @aria'le Mean * + ) , 1 ; 0 *. &ge '0,77 ',6> +. ?ationalit/ 0,66O ). Gender *,097 *,097 ,. Self! (6,76 7,6> 0,61 0,07 *,1>9 monitoring -. Self! 6,'6 0,(0 *0,07 0,06 *,1(' 0,'( promotion 1. Ingratiation 6,'7 0,(> *0,01 0,06 *,166 0,07 0,6>O ;. 8iking 6,6> 0,(( *0,'9 0,00 ,077 0,09 0,16 *0,11 0. (ompetence 6,69 0,7' *0,7> *0,09 ,107 0,10 0,'6 *0,09 0,7>OO :. Influence 6,70 0,66 *0,'( 0,06 *,0(7 0,1( 0,'6 *0,0( 0,6(OO 0,>7OO
N = 41 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
* (6 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
%a'le 1.+ "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the .ogeschool 4u/d sample @aria'le Mean S.d * + ) , 1 ; *. &ge '0,(' ',07 +. Gender *0,'1 ). Self! (7,70 9,'9 0,1( *0,1( monitoring ,. Self! 6,76 0,70 0,67 0,17 0,16 promotion -. Ingratiation 6,16 0,6> 0,07 0,'( 0,0> *0,01 1. 8iking 7,1> 0,71 *0,07 0,(6O 0,66 0,17 0,61 ;. (ompetence 6,>7 0,66 0,'( 0,67 0,77O 0,'' 0,'> 0,79O 0. Influence 6,>0 0,66 0,61 0,69 0,09 0,09 0,17 0,60OO 0,7'OO
%a'le 1.) "earson correlations, means and standard deviations for the $oined sample @aria'le Mean S.d * + ) , 1 *. &ge '0,7' ','( +. ?ationalit/ 0,'>O ). Gender *0,17 *0,10 ,. Self! monitoring (7,11 >,07 0,'7 0,0' *0,1( -. Self! promotion 6,60 0,7> 0,07 *0,0( 0,01 0,'' 1. Ingratiation 6,19 0,61 *0,0' 0,06 0,0( 0,07 0,19 ;. 8iking 6,>( 0,(6 *0,'1 *0,17 0,'7O 0,'0 0,'' *0,06 0. (ompetence 6,7( 0,70 *0,'6O *0,11 0,'6 0,'( 0,'(O 0,06 :. Influence 6,(7 0,69 *0,0> *0,0( 0,'0 0,17 0,'(O *0,01
0,6>OO 0,66OO
0,>0OO
1.+ (omparison of samples %eca se data were c!llected "r!$ tw! di""erent sa$ples0 it has t! -e c!ntr!lled0 in h!w "ar di""erences in the varia-les $eas red and in the relati!n -etween the varia-les $eas red can -e ascri-ed t! the resp!ndents -el!nging t! !ne !" the tw! sa$ples, &lth! gh0 -!th sa$ples sh!w c!nsidera-le si$ilarities in the type !" gr! p pr!ject and the pr!ced res that were "!ll!wed0 the act al assign$ents di""ered and the di""erent ed cati!nal syste$s $ight have an
* (7 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
in"l ence !n the a$! nt and 2ind !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics sed in a gr! p and !n h!w gr! p $e$-ers react t! these tactics, Independent sa$ple t*tests are r n !n the dependent and independent varia-les in the tw! di""erent gr! ps t! search "!r di""erences in ratings !" sel"*$!nit!ring0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 and gr! p $e$-er ratings, +he independent sa$ple t*tests 9ta-le 6,7; !nly sh!w signi"icant di""erences -etween the tw! sa$ples !n the varia-les F@i2ingG and FIn"l enceG, +he $eans !" these varia-les indicate that !n average0 the st dents at the /!gesch!!l C yd rated their c!*w!r2ers higher !n these varia-les than the st dents !" :n!wledge #ngineering,
%a'le 1., Independent sample t!test results on the two samples. Mean Std.deviation Significance &ge 3nowledge '0,77 ',677 ,966 ngineering '0,69 ',061 .ogeschool 4u/d Self!monitoring 3nowledge (6,76 7,6>' ,6'1 ngineering (7,7> 9,'9> .ogeschool 4u/d Self!promotion 3nowledge 6,''6 ,799 ,077 ngineering 6,776 ,716 .ogeschool 4u/d Ingratiation 3nowledge 6,'77 ,(>' ,66( ngineering 6,09> ,669 .ogeschool 4u/d 8iking 3nowledge 6,6>1 ,((0 ,001 ngineering 7,166 ,7'6 .ogeschool 4u/d (ompetence 3nowledge 6,6>> ,71> ,670 ngineering 6,>6' ,6(6 .ogeschool 4u/d Influence 3nowledge 6,700 ,660 ,06( ngineering 6,77( ,6>1 .ogeschool 4u/d
+! test i" di""erences in the relati!n -etween tw! varia-les can -e ascri-ed t! the resp!ndents -el!nging t! !ne !" the tw! sa$ples0 a d $$y varia-le is created "!r the /!gesch!!l C yd sa$ple, +his varia-le assigns the val e F0G t! the 2n!wledge engineering sa$ple and the val e
* (( *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
F1G t! the /!gesch!!l C yd sa$ple, ?henever the relati!nship -etween a dependent and an independent varia-le is tested -y $eans !" a regressi!n0 the d $$y varia-le is entered int! the eE ati!n as a c!rrecti!n ter$, In the cases in which hyp!theses are tested -y $eans !" c!rrelati!ns -etween the varia-les0 partial c!rrelati!ns are sed in which the varia-le FSa$pleG has -een entered as a c!ntr!l varia-le, & partial c!rrelati!n is a c!rrelati!n -etween tw! varia-les in which the e""ect !" an!ther varia-le is held c!nstant 9Field0 '000;, S!0 in the c!rrelati!ns sed0 the e""ect !" -el!nging t! !ne !" the tw! sa$ples has -een c!ntr!lled "!r,
1.) ./potheses testing /yp!theses 10 '0 60 (0 70 >0 100 110 and 1' will -e tested -y l!!2ing at the partial c!rrelati!ns -etween the varia-les, %eca se the hyp!theses all speci"y the directi!n in which the c!rrelati!n is e3pected0 signi"icance is calc lated !n a 1*tailed level, /yp!theses 7 and 6 will -e tested sing ' regressi!n $!dels as pr!p!sed -y %ar!n and :enny 919>6; t! chec2 "!r $!derating e""ects, /yp!theses 9 and 16 will -e tested sing 6 regressi!n $!dels as pr!p!sed -y %ar!n and :enny 919>6; t! chec2 "!r $ediating e""ects, Finally0 t! test the pr!-le$ state$ent !" the research F#o impression management tactics affect the amount of influence a group member has in a group780 a regressi!n !n in"l ence will -e r n with the c!ntr!l0 varia-les entered "irst and s -seE ently the independent varia-les,
%a'le 1.*!tailed partial correlations for the $oined sample with 7Sample9 as a control varia'le @aria'le * + ) , 1 ; 0 *. &ge +. ?ationalit/ 0,60OO ). Gender *0,17 *0,06 ,. Self!monitoring 0,'(O 0,0( *0,16 -. Self!promotion 0,07 0,06 *0,19 ,0'1O 1. Ingratiation *0,0' 0,0' 0,07 0,0> 0,'6O ;. 8iking *0,'6O 0,00 0,'6O 0,19P 0,17 0,0' 0. (ompetence *0,'6O *0,07 0,''O 0,'7O 0,'6O 0,0( 0,69OO :. Influence *0,0> 0,07 0,17P 0,16 0,0' 0,66OO 0,>0OO 0,'0
N = 64 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed). Correlation is significant at the 0.10 level (1-tailed).
* (6 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
/yp!thesis 1 predicts that) sc!res !" a gr! p $e$-er !n the revised sel"*$!nit!ring scale will -e p!sitively related with the in"l ence !" that $e$-er !n gr! p decisi!ns, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and in"l ence is n!t signi"icant at the (M level0 s! the hyp!thesis d!es n!t h!ld, /!wever0 with a signi"icance !" 0,1('0 and a p!sitive c!rrelati!n c!e""icient !" 0,160 it sh!ws a slight trend t!wards signi"icance, /yp!thesis ' predicts a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween sel"* $!nit!ring and sel"*pr!$!ti!n is 0,'1 and signi"icant at a (M level, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and ingratiati!n is n!t signi"icant, +his leads t! the c!ncl si!n that hyp!thesis ' is partially s pp!rted1 sel"*$!nit!ring see$s t! -e related t! the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 h!wever sel"*$!nit!ring see$s n!t t! -e related the tactic !" ingratiati!n in a gr! p sit ati!n, /yp!thesis 6 predicts a p!sitive relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing !n a gr! p level, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n t rned ! t n!t t! -e signi"icant and c!nseE ently there was n! evidence "!r this relati!n, /yp!thesis ( states that there will -e a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence !n a gr! p level, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n c!e""icient -etween these varia-les is 0,'6 and signi"icant at the (M level indicating that there is a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"* pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence, /yp!thesis 7 predicts a p!sitive relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and in"l ence in a gr! p, /!wever0 the 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween the tw! varia-les is n!t signi"icant0 indicating n! relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and in"l ence, /yp!thesis > states that there will -e a p!sitive relati!n -etween li2ing !n a gr! p level and in"l ence in that gr! p, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween these varia-les see$s t! s pp!rt this1 with a c!rrelati!n c!e""icient !" 0,660 signi"icant at the 1M level there appears t! -e a str!ng relati!nship -etween h!w $ ch a pers!n is li2ed within a gr! p and h!w $ ch in"l ence that pers!n has within that gr! p, * (7 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
/yp!thesis 10 predicts a p!sitive relati!n -etween li2ing !n a gr! p level and perceived c!$petence !n that gr! p level, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween these varia-les see$s t! s pp!rt this1 with a c!rrelati!n c!e""icient !" 0,6>0 signi"icant at the 1M level there appears t! -e a str!ng relati!nship -etween h!w $ ch a pers!n is li2ed within a gr! p and h!w c!$petent his c!*w!r2ers thin2 he is, /yp!thesis 11 states that there will -e a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and in"l ence in a gr! p, ?ith a 5artial c!rrelati!n !" 0,'00 which is n!t signi"icant at the (M level0 this hyp!thesis is n!t s pp!rted, /!wever -eca se the c!rrelati!n has a signi"icance !" 0,0(>0 there see$s t! -e a str!ng trend t!wards signi"icance, /yp!thesis 1' predicts that there will -e a relati!n -etween perceived c!$petence in a gr! p and in"l ence in that gr! p, +he 5artial c!rrelati!n -etween these varia-les see$s t! s pp!rt this1 with a c!rrelati!n c!e""icient !" 0,>00 signi"icant at the 1M level there appears t! -e a str!ng relati!nship -etween h!w c!$petent a gr! p $e$-er is perceived t! -e -y his c!* w!r2ers and h!w $ ch in"l ence he has within that gr! p,
1., %he moderating role of self!monitoring /yp!theses 7 and 6 deal with the $!derating r!le !" sel"*$!nit!ring !n the relati!n -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and i$pressi!ns $ade !n a gr! p level, /yp!thesis 7 predicts the $!derating r!le !" sel"*$!nit!ring !n the relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing !n a gr! p level, /yp!thesis 6 predicts the $!derating r!le !" sel"*$!nit!ring !n the relati!nship -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence, &cc!rding t! %ar!n and :enny 919>6;0 a $!derat!r is a varia-le that a""ects the directi!n andQ!r strength !" the relati!n -etween an independent and a dependent varia-le, In !ther w!rds0 there is a $!derat!r e""ect i" there e3ists an interacti!n e""ect !" the independent varia-le and the $!derat!r varia-le !n the dependent varia-le, +he e""ect !" a $!derat!r0 nder the ass $pti!n that it linearly a""ects the relati!nship -etween the dependent and the independent varia-le0 can -e $eas red -y adding the pr!d ct !" the $!derat!r and the independent varia-le t! the regressi!n eE ati!n, +he $!derat!r e""ect is $eas red -y the e""ect !" the pr!d ct !" the $!derat!r and the independent varia-le, * (> *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
+! test hyp!thesis 70 tw! regressi!ns are r n)

'odel +: @i2ing N 0 J Ingratiati!n 1J Sel"*$!nit!ring ' 'odel ,: @i2ing N 0 J Ingratiati!n 1J Sel"*$!nit!ring ' J 9Ingratiati!n O Sel"*$!nit!ring; 6
/ere 6 represents the pr!d ct !" the $!derat!r and the independent varia-le, +here"!re i" the c!e""icient !" 6 has a signi"icant p*val e0 sel"*$!nit!ring can -e said t! -e a $!derat!r in the relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and li2ing, %eca se sel"*$!nit!ring is e3pected t! have a p!sitive e""ect !n this relati!n0 hyp!thesis 7 predicts that the directi!n c!e""icient !" 6 sh! ld -e p!sitive, +he res lts !" the regressi!ns are sh!wn in ta-le 6,6,
%a'le 1.1 2egressions to test for the moderating effect of self!monitoring in the relation 'etween ingratiation and liking &d$. Dep. Stand. Model 2B Significance Ind. varia'le p!value 2B varia'le Ceta ,00> ,97( Ingratiati!n Sel"* 1 ,'06 ,166 ,006 @i2ing ,176 ,169 $!nit!ring ,709 ,001 Sa$ple *,6>' ,10> Ingratiati!n Sel"* *,666 ,'97 $!nit!ring Ingratiati!nO ' ,'77 ,19' ,00' @i2ing Sel"* ,907 ,091 $!nit!ring Sa$ple ,701 ,001
+he regressi!n de$!nstrates that $!del 1 and $!del ' are signi"icant at the (M level, /!wever the p*val es "!r the varia-les FIngratiati!nG and FSel"*$!nit!ringG are n!t signi"icant0 indicating that !nly the c!ntr!l varia-le FSa$pleG is resp!nsi-le "!r $a2ing the $!del signi"icant, +his is n!t t!tally ne3pected -eca se the t*tests already de$!nstrated a signi"icant di""erence -etween the $eans "!r F@i2ingG !" the tw! sa$ples, +he interacti!n ter$ FIngratiati!nOSel"*$!nit!ringG is signi"icant at the 10M level, S!0 there see$s t! -e s!$e s pp!rt "!r the $!derating e""ect !" sel"*$!nit!ring !n the relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and * (9 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
li2ing despite the "act that ingratiati!n and sel"*$!nit!ring d!nGt have signi"icant si$ple e""ects,
+! test hyp!thesis 60 tw! regressi!ns are r n)

'odel +: 4!$petence N 0 J Sel"*pr!$!ti!n 1J Sel"*$!nit!ring ' 'odel ,: 4!$petence N 0 J Sel"*pr!$!ti!n 1J Sel"*$!nit!ring ' J 9Sel"*pr!$!ti!n O Sel"*$!nit!ring; 6
/ere 6 represents the pr!d ct !" the $!derat!r and the independent varia-le, +here"!re i" the c!e""icient !" 6 has a signi"icant p*val e0 sel"*$!nit!ring can -e said t! -e a $!derat!r in the relati!nship -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence, %eca se sel"*$!nit!ring is e3pected t! have a p!sitive e""ect !n this relati!n0 hyp!thesis 6 predicts that the directi!n c!e""icient !" 6 sh! ld -e p!sitive, +he res lts !" the regressi!n are sh!wn in ta-le 6,7
%a'le 1.; 2egressions to test for the moderating effect of self!monitoring in the relation 'etween self! promotion and perceived competence Ind. Dep. Model 2B &d$. 2B Significance Stand. Ceta p!value varia'le varia'le Sel"* ,1>> ,17> pr!$!ti!n Sel"* 1 ,106 ,0(9 ,0>( 4!$petence ,'00 ,116 $!nit!ring Sa$ple ,067 ,(96 Sel"* *,76' ,60( pr!$!ti!n Sel"* *,719 ,61> $!nit!ring Sel"* pr!$!ti!nO ' ,169 ,0>1 ,06' 4!$petence ,9>7 ,1'7 Sel"* $!nit!ring Sa$ple ,076 ,((6
+he regressi!n de$!nstrates that the "irst $!del is !nly signi"icant at the 10M level, +he c!e""icients "!r the independent varia-les see$s t! -e insigni"icant, /!wever0 with a p*val e !" 0,17> "!r sel"*pr!$!ti!n and a p*val e !" 0,116 "!r sel"*$!nit!ring0 there see$s t! -e a slight trend t!wards signi"icance, +he incl si!n !" the interacti!n ter$ Sel"*pr!$!ti!nOSel"* * 60 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
$!nit!ring $a2es the $!del slightly $!re signi"icant - t the para$eter itsel" is n!t signi"icant with a p*val e !" 0,1'7, +his indicates that the data d!es n!t give s pp!rting evidence that the relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and perceived c!$petence is $!derated -y sel"*$!nit!ring,
1.- %he mediating role of impressions /yp!theses 9 and 16 deal with the $ediating r!les !" i$pressi!ns in the relati!n -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and in"l ence, /yp!thesis 9 predicts that li2ing !n a gr! p level will " ncti!n as a $ediat!r in the relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and in"l ence in a gr! p, /yp!thesis 16 predicts that perceived c!$petence will " ncti!n as a $ediat!r in the relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and in"l ence in a gr! p, &cc!rding t! %ar!n and :enny 919>6; a varia-le " ncti!ns as a $ediat!r t! the e3tent that it acc! nts "!r the relati!n -etween the predict!r and the criteri!n, F!r a varia-le t! -e a $ediat!r acc!rding t! the article !" %ar!n and :enny 919>6;) 9a; variati!ns in levels !" the independent varia-le sh! ld signi"icantly acc! nt "!r variati!ns in the $ediat!r0 9-; variati!ns in the $ediat!r sh! ld signi"icantly acc! nt "!r variati!ns in the dependent varia-le0 and 9c; when the relati!nships $enti!ned nder 9a; and 9-; are c!ntr!lled "!r0 a previ! sly signi"icant relati!n -etween the independent and dependent varia-le decreases in signi"icance !r pre"era-ly0 is n! l!nger signi"icant, I" it decreases in signi"icance0 this indicates the e3istence !" $ ltiple $ediat!rs0 i" it is n! l!nger signi"icant it is the !nly $ediat!r, +! investigate i" a varia-le is a $ediat!r0 regressi!n analysis can -e sed in which) 91; the $ediat!r sh! ld -e regressed !n the independent varia-le0 9'; the dependent varia-le sh! ld -e regressed !n the independent varia-le, 96; the dependent varia-le sh! ld -e regressed !n the $ediat!r and the independent varia-le si$ ltane! sly, I" the varia-le really is a $ediat!r) the independent varia-le $ st a""ect the $ediat!r 91;0 the independent varia-le $ st a""ect the dependent varia-le 9';0 the signi"icance !" the relati!n -etween the independent varia-le and the dependent varia-le $ st decrease i" the dependent varia-le is regressed !n the independent varia-le and the $ediat!r si$ ltane! sly,
* 61 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
+! test hyp!thesis 90 three regressi!ns are r n)

'odel +: @i2ing N 0 J Ingratiati!n 1 'odel ,: In"l ence N 0 J Ingratiati!n 1 'odel -: In"l ence N 0 J Ingratiati!n 1J @i2ing '
I" /9 is c!rrect0 -!th $!del 1 and $!del ' sh! ld -e signi"icant, F rther$!re0 the signi"icance !" the 1 c!e""icient sh! ld decrease in $!del 6 as c!$pared t! $!del ', +he res lts !" the regressi!ns are sh!wn in ta-le 6,>,
%a'le 1.0 2egressions to test for the mediating effect of liking in the relation 'etween ingratiation and influence Ind. Dep. Stand. Model 2B &d$. 2B Significance p!value varia'le varia'le Ceta 1 ,176 ,179 ,006 @i2ing Ingratiati!n ,0'' ,>(1 Sa$ple ,7'1 ,001 ' ,'6( ,070 ,109 In"l ence Ingratiati!n ,019 ,>>0 Sa$ple ,'66 ,066 Ingratiati!n ,007 ,966 6 ,66' ,76> ,000 In"l ence @i2ing ,66> ,000 Sa$ple *,01( ,>>7
&s can -e seen "r!$ the data0 $!del 1 is signi"icant at the (M level, /!wever0 the $!del see$s t! -e signi"icant -eca se !" the predictive val e !" the c!ntr!l varia-le FSa$pleG, +his c! ld -e e3pected -eca se the t*tests already de$!nstrated a signi"icant di""erence -etween the $eans "!r F@i2ingG !" the tw! sa$ples, M!del three t rns ! t t! -e signi"icant -eca se !" the str!ng relati!n -etween li2ing and in"l ence, Ingratiati!n d!es n!t see$ t! -e a g!!d predict!r "!r either li2ing !r in"l ence, It $ st there"!re -e c!ncl ded that -eca se the relati!nship -etween ingratiati!n and in"l ence d!es n!t see$ t! e3ist0 there is n! se in c!ntr!lling i" li2ing $ediates this relati!nship,
* 6' *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
+! test hyp!thesis 160 three regressi!ns are r n)

'odel +: 4!$petence N 0 J Sel"*pr!$!ti!n 1 'odel ,: In"l ence N 0 J Sel"*pr!$!ti!n 1 'odel -: In"l ence N 0 J Sel"*pr!$!ti!n 1J 4!$petence '
I" /16 is c!rrect0 -!th $!del 1 and $!del ' sh! ld -e signi"icant, F rther$!re0 the signi"icance !" the 1 c!e""icient sh! ld decrease in $!del 6 as c!$pared t! $!del ', +he res lts !" the regressi!n are sh!wn in ta-le 6,9,
%a'le 1.: 2egressions to test for the mediating effect of perceived competence in the relation 'etween self! promotion and influence Ind. Dep. Stand. Model 2B &d$. 2B Significance p!value varia'le varia'le Ceta 1 ,06( ,06( ,1'7 4!$petence Sel"*pr!$!ti!n ,'61 ,077 Sa$ple ,070 ,(>7 ' ,107 ,07> ,06' In"l ence Sel"*pr!$!ti!n ,19> ,117 Sa$ple ,''0 ,0>1 Sel"*pr!$!ti!n ,019 ,>0> 6 ,666 ,676 ,000 In"l ence 4!$petence ,77' ,000 Sa$ple ,166 ,06(
+he data indicates that the "irst regressi!n $!del has a p*val e !" 0,1'7 which is n!t signi"icant at the 10M level, /!wever0 in $!del 10 the p*val e !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n is ,077 which is signi"icant at the 10M level, +he sec!nd* and the third $!del are signi"icant at the (M level, +he signi"icance !" the 1 c!e""icient 9sel"*pr!$!ti!n; decreases "r!$ $!del '0 with a p* val e !" 0,1170 t! $!del 6 with a p*val e !" 0,>0>, +his indicates that perceived c!$petence can -e seen as a $ediating varia-le in the relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and in"l ence, /!wever0 -eca se $!del 1 is n!t signi"icant at the 10M level0 n! s!lid c!ncl si!n can -e drawn "r!$ this analysis,
* 66 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
1.1 Model +! test the pr!-le$ state$ent !" the research0 i" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics sed in a gr! p can lead t! increased in"l ence in that gr! p0 6 regressi!ns were r n, +he "irst regressi!n0 which is sed as a c!$paris!n $!del0 !nly incl des the c!ntr!l varia-les) sa$ple0 age0 nati!nality 9H tch !r n!n*H tch;0 and gender, In the sec!nd $!del the i$pressi!ns !" li2ing and c!$petence were incl ded, In the third regressi!n the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n were incl ded, +a-le 6,10 sh!ws the res lts !" the three regressi!ns,
%a'le 1.*< 2egression anal/sis of the dependent varia'le influence against the control varia'les, impressions, and impression management tactics. dependent Standardized Model 2B &d$. 2B #!value Significance varia'le Ceta p!value 1 ,106 ,07' 1,696 ,166 ,000 4!nstant ,'6> ,07> Sa$ple *,076 ,(77 &ge ,07> ,(7' Bati!nality ,1(6 ,''0 8ender ' ,69( ,666 '1,611 ,000 ,'9( 4!nstant ,166 ,17' Sa$ple ,1'( ,1'6 &ge ,0(9 ,77( Bati!nality *,007 ,9'7 8ender ,16' ,160 @i2ing ,711 ,000 4!$petence 6 ,69( ,6(1 1(,6(> ,000 ,679 4!nstant ,160 ,16> Sa$ple ,1'7 ,166 &ge ,060 ,779 Bati!nality *,006 ,970 8ender ,161 ,169 @i2ing ,710 ,000 4!$petence Sel"* ,006 ,97( pr!$!ti!n *,016 ,>6( Ingratiati!n
M!del 1 is n!t signi"icant at the (M level and with a l!w AR adj sted0 indicating the "it !" the $!del0 it appears that the $!del c! ld -e i$pr!ved -y adding the !ther independent varia-les, +he incl si!n !" the varia-les F@i2ingG and F4!$petenceG signi"icantly i$pr!ves the $!del, #specially perceived c!$petence0 with a p*val e !" 0,000 see$s t! have a str!ng
* 67 *
4hapter 6, Aes lts
predictive val e "!r the a$! nt !" in"l ence a pers!n is e3pected t! have in a gr! p, Finally0 the incl si!n !" the varia-les FSel"*pr!$!ti!nG and FIngratiati!nG d!es n!t see$ t! i$pr!ve the $!del1 +he &dj sted AR decreases "r!$ 666 t! 6(1 and the F*val e decreases "r!$ '1,611 t! 1(,6(>, +his indicates that sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n have n! predictive val e !n the in"l ence a pers!n has in a gr! p !ver and a-!ve the predictive val e !" perceived c!$petence and li2ing,
Model 1.* 2elations 'etween the varia'les as tested '/ the h/potheses
Ingratiati!n
@i2ing J0,66OO J0,69OO
Sel"* $!nit!ring J0,'1O
In"l ence
J0,>0OO Sel"* pr!$!ti!n J 0,'6O 5erceived c!$petence
J0,'0
= significant at the 5! level

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (1-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed). Correlation is significant at the 0.10 level (1-tailed).
* 6( *
4hapter 7, Hisc ssi!n and li$itati!ns
;. Discussion and limitations

;.* Discussion of results and implications for future research +he present research e3a$ined the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r in a gr! p and especially the e""ect !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !n the a$! nt !" in"l ence a gr! p $e$-er has within a pr!ject tea$, +his e""ect was hyp!thesised t! -e $ediated -y the "av! ra-le i$pressi!ns !" perceived c!$petence and li2ing, &s hyp!thesised0 the i$pressi!ns !" li2ing and c!$petence were "! nd t! -e str!ngly related, In line with the res lts !" 8!d"rey et al, 919>6; it see$s pr!-a-le that i" s -jects are a-le t! increase li2ing -y a target0 perceived c!$petence will als! increase, /!wever0 -eca se -!th varia-les were $eas red at the sa$e ti$e in this research0 it is n!t p!ssi-le t! $a2e a ca sal lin2 -etween the tw! varia-les, +he e""ect can there"!re -e in -!th directi!ns1 it c! ld als! -e that the $!re c!$petent a pers!n is perceived t! -e0 -y his c!*w!r2ers0 the $!re th!se c!* w!r2ers will li2e that pers!n, B!twithstanding the ca sal lin2 -etween the varia-les0 the tw! sa$ples separately0 as well as0 the j!ined sa$ple sh!w str!ngly signi"icant relati!ns -etween the i$pressi!ns gr! p $e$-ers have !" a c!*w!r2er and the a$! nt !" in"l ence that pers!n has within the gr! p, In line with the res lts !" the research !" %!nner 9'007;0 it see$s that the a$! nt !" in"l ence a pers!n has within a gr! p is p!sitively related with the e3pectati!ns !" the !ther gr! p $e$-ers a-! t the a-ilities !" that pers!n t! c!ntri- te t! the gr! p g!als, In line with the research !" 4arli et al, 9199(; and the c!ncept !" re"erent p!wer !" French and Aaven 919(9;0 li2ing als! t rned ! t t! -e str!ngly related t! in"l ence, &lth! gh the partial c!rrelati!ns sh!wed s!$e li$ited evidence "!r the relati!n -etween sel"* pr!$!ti!n and in"l ence0 the regressi!n analysis0 r n !n the dependent varia-le FIn"l enceG0 indicated that sel"*pr!$!ti!n and ingratiati!n have n! predictive val e !n the in"l ence a pers!n has in a gr! p !ver and a-!ve the predictive val e !" perceived c!$petence and li2ing, Fr!$ these res lts0 it $ st -e c!ncl ded that n! evidence was "! nd that i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics can lead t! increased in"l ence in a w!r2 gr! p, Several e3planati!ns are p!ssi-le t! e3plain this ne3pected res lt, First !" all0 -eca se the gr! ps w!r2ed intensively t!gether "!r a c!nsidera-le a$! nt !" ti$e0 it is p!ssi-le that the $e$-ers g!t t! 2n!w the relative c!ntri- ti!ns and strengths !" their c!*
* 66 *
w!r2ers t! s ch an e3tent that the r!le !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent in "!r$ing i$pressi!ns was s! $arginal that it -eca$e insigni"icant, Aesearch res lts !n the a-ility !" peers t! asses the c!$petences !" their c!*w!r2ers have -een $i3ed, S!$e st dies see$ t! s pp!rt the view that peers are acc rate in assessing the FrealG c!$petence !" their c!lleag es 9:ane & @awler0 197>1 /enry0 Stric2land0 D!rges0 & @add0 1996;, In !ther researches0 signi"icant gaps were "! nd -etween !-jective per"!r$ance and perceived c!$petence 9@i--y0 +r!t$an0 & Ci$$er0 19>71 @ittlepage et al,0 199(;, It see$s that the acc rateness !" percepti!ns !" c!$petence is a " ncti!n !" the c!$ple3ity !" the tas2 and the a$! nt !" in"!r$ati!n the gr! p $e$-ers have !n the per"!r$ance !" their c!lleag es, +he a$! nt !" in"!r$ati!n !n the per"!r$ance !" their c!*w!r2ers can -e e3pected t! increase the l!nger they have w!r2ed t!gether, I" a$-ig ity !ver FrealG per"!r$ance decreases !ver ti$e0 the in"l ence !" sel"* presentati!ns !n perceived c!$petence $ay als! decrease !ver ti$e, #3pectati!n states the!ry 9%erger et al,0 1977; predicts that $e$-ers !" a gr! p se easily !-serva-le characteristics "!r esta-lishing the initial relati!ns that $a2e p the gr! p str ct re, S!$e researches indicate that the initial stat s that devel!ps in this way re$ains relatively sta-le 9A!sa & Ma. r0 1979;, +he hyp!theses a-! t the relati!n -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and in"l ence were partly -ased !n this c!ncept1 it was e3pected that pe!ple sc!ring high !n sel"*presentati!n0 w! ld actively $anip late the c es they gave !"" in !rder t! create a "av!ra-le initial p!siti!n "!r the$selves and they w! ld h!ld this p!siti!n d ring the wh!le pr!ject, /!wever0 it $ay -e that the divisi!n !" in"l ence within a gr! p d!es n!t re$ain sta-le, @i"e*cycle the!ries 9&rr!w0 19971 + c2$an0 196(1 Ae$$erswaal0 199>; and the!ries !" n!n*seE ential gr! p devel!p$ent 9&rr!w0 19971 8ersic20 1997; give a $!re dyna$ic view !" relati!nship patterns within gr! ps, @i"ecycle the!ries p!sit that gr! ps g! thr! gh a seE ence !" stages which $a2e the initially "!r$ed patterns s scepti-le t! change, &"ter the initial "!r$ing stage "!ll!ws a st!r$ing stage in which the initial gr! p str ct re is challenged and changed -e"!re it sta-ili.es in the n!r$ing stage, Aesearchers !" n!n*seE ential the!ries !" gr! p devel!p$ent draw attenti!n t! ca ses "r!$ the envir!n$ent !" the gr! p that can in"l ence gr! p*str ct re, Sel"*presentati!ns $ay there"!re have a str!nger e""ect !n in"l ence in the initial stage !" the gr! p pr!cess - t this e""ect can wea2en as the gr! p " rther devel!ps d e t! internal and e3ternal ca ses and d e t! increased in"!r$ati!n a-! t the gr! p $e$-ers that -ec!$es availa-le d ring the pr!ject, /ere "!r0 it w! ld -e interesting t! l!!2 at the dyna$ic e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent !ver ti$e and t! investigate i" the relati!n -etween the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and interpers!nal ! tc!$es declines !ver ti$e, * 67 *
Sec!ndly0 as + rnley and %!lin! 9'001; n!ticed0 it is n!t !nly the a$! nt !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent - t als! the s2ill !" the act!r in $anaging i$pressi!ns0 that plays a r!le in the s ccess" l ! tc!$e !" sel"*presentati!ns, %eca se !" di""erent a dience val es0 di""erent attri- ti!n styles0 c!$ple3ities in targeting sel"*presentati!n tactics0 di"" si!n !" e""ects0 and interacti!n e""ects !" the a dience0 $a2ing s ccess" l sel"*presentati!ns "!r a gr! p !" pe!ple is e3pected t! -e even $!re di""ic lt than it is in a !ne*t!*!ne interacti!n, &s V!hs et al, 9'00(; de$!nstrated0 challenging !r c! nter n!r$ative sel"*presentati!ns reE ire sel"* reg lat!ry res! rces and these res! rces can -e depleted i" an individ al engages in sel"* reg lat!ry tas2s, %eca se the $!derating e""ect !" sel"*$!nit!ring was n!t "! nd t! -e signi"icant in this research0 n! $eas re was availa-le t! assess the i$pressi!n $anage$ent s2ill !" the individ als, It is there"!re p!ssi-le that a str!nger relati!n w! ld e3ist -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics and ! tc!$es "!r high*s2illed i$pressi!n $anagers and i$pressi!n $anagers high in sel"*reg lati!n, M!re research w! ld there"!re -e needed a-! t the speci"ic s2ills that are necessary "!r act!rs t! reach "av!ra-le ! tc!$es in their i$pressi!n $anage$ent atte$pts, &n interesting "inding !" this research is that there see$s t! -e s!$e evidence "!r a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and the i$pressi!ns !" c!$petence and li2ing !n a gr! p level0 while there is n! s ch evidence "!r the tactic !" ingratiati!n, +his res lt see$s c!ntradict!ry t! ! tc!$es !" researches !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent !n a dyadic level, In researches !n dyadic sit ati!ns0 there has generally -een "! nd a signi"icant relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and p!sitive i$pressi!ns0 s ch as li2ing and c!$petence0 while !"ten n! relati!n -etween sel"*pr!$!ti!n and s ch p!sitive ! tc!$es has -een "! nd 98!d"rey et al,0 19>61 ?ayne0 & Ferris0 19901 ?ayne0 & @iden0 199(1 8!rd!n0 19961 /iggins et al,0 '006;, #3planati!ns "!r these c!ntradict!ry res lts $ay -e "! nd0 "irst0 in the di""erence -etween the se !" sel"*presentati!ns in a hierarchical eE al level as !pp!sed t! the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics in an pward directi!n0 and sec!nd0 in the di""erence -etween the dyadic level and the gr! p level, M!st previ! s researches in i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics "eat red sit ati!ns in which the sel"*presenter was in s!$eway dependent !n the target, F!r instance0 s pervis!r*s -!rdinate relati!ns !r applicant*interviewer relati!ns were !"ten st died, In s ch sit ati!ns0 the target $ay -e $!re critical !" the act!rGs sel"*pr!$!ti!n state$ents than in a sit ati!n in which the targets are peers wh! interact with the act!r !n an eE al gr! nd, +he research !" %lic2le 9'006; see$s t! s pp!rt the idea that the l!nger an assess!r has w!r2ed with a c!*w!r2er0 the $!re p!sitive he is e3pected t! eval ate this c!lleag e, +he research !" 4a$p-ell and Fehr * 6> *
91990; indicates that ! tside !-servers are $!re critical than st dent peers0 wh! interact with an individ al, &s i$pressi!n $anage$ent was $eas red in a hierarchically eE al sit ati!n0 this $ight e3plain the p!sitive ! tc!$es "! nd "!r sel"*pr!$!ti!n in this research, Une3pected was als! that n! relati!n was "! nd -etween ingratiati!n and p!sitive i$pressi!ns, On a gr! p level0 a distincti!n sh! ld -e $ade -etween targeted and n!n* targeted tactics, Ingratiati!n0 as !pp!sed t! sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 is generally sed as a targeted i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic1 it is ai$ed at !ne !r $!re individ als in the a dience and n!t necessarily t! the a dience as a wh!le, %eca se !" this0 the !ther individ als in the a dience will -ec!$e -ystanders and -ystander e""ects can arise0 in which the pe!ple wh! are n!t ingratiated0 $ay "eel resent$ent t!wards the ingratiat!r 9V!n20 '00';, F rther$!re0 the e""ect !" targeted i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics $ay di"" se0 i" sed in a gr! p0 -eca se their e""ectiveness $ay lie in the pers!nal t! ch -etween the act!r and the target 98!""$an0 19(9;, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n !n the !ther hand is a "airly straight"!rward tactic which is sed in !rder t! create a "av!ra-le i$pressi!n with! t the necessity and draw-ac2s !" having t! target it at individ al $e$-ers !" the gr! p, In this research0 the i$pressi!ns gr! p $e$-ers had !" a target0 were averaged t! create $eas res !n a gr! p level, Hata !n the e""ect !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !n speci"ic individ als have n!t -een analy.ed, Ingratiati!n and sel"*pr!$!ti!n have -een $eas red as i" they were directed at the gr! p as a wh!le and i$pressi!ns were $eas red as i" they were "!r$ed -y the gr! p as a wh!le, In this way0 it is n!t ta2en int! acc! nt i" an i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic is ai$ed at the gr! p as a wh!le !r i" it is ai$ed at speci"ic individ als and there is n! in"!r$ati!n a-! t h!w the sc!res !" i$pressi!ns are divided -etween the gr! p $e$-ers, &n individ al with an average sc!re "!r F@i2ingG c! ld "!r e3a$ple -e li2ed a l!t -y s!$e $e$-ers !" the gr! p and despised -y !thers0 while he c! ld als! -e $!derately li2ed -y all !" the$, +! give a $!re acc rate pict re !" reality0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent and the "!r$ed i$pressi!ns in a gr! p can -etter -e depicted -y a s!cial relati!ns $!del 9SAM; 9Marc s0 199>;, %y sing this $!del0 it can -e ta2en int! acc! nt that in a gr! p sit ati!n the $e$-ers !" the gr! p will all -e act!rs0 as well as0 a dience "!r the i$pressi!n $anage$ent per"!r$ances !" !thers, In a SAM $!del a distincti!n is $ade -etween an act!r e""ect0 a target e""ect0 and a relati!nship e""ect, +he act!r e""ect is the general e""ect0 an act!r has !n his gr! p*$e$-ers1 the way pers!n & is generally seen -y his gr! p $e$-ers, +he target e""ect c!vers h!w a target generally reacts t! his gr! p $e$-ers, +his e""ect w! ld -e c!$para-le t! the attri- ti!n style !" the target -eca se it relates t! the tendency !" individ als t! attri- te the -ehavi! r !" !thers in a speci"ic way, +he relati!nship e""ect * 69 *
acc! nts "!r the niE e percepti!ns0 an individ al target $ay have a-! t an act!r, +his last e""ect $ay acc! nt "!r the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics0 speci"ically targeted at individ al pers!ns, In !rder t! really $eas re the di""erential e""ects !" targeted i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics0 resp!ndents sh! ld -e as2ed0 h!w !"ten they applied a certain 2ind !" tactic with gr! p $e$-er 10 h!w !"ten with gr! p $e$-er '0 etc,,, +he draw-ac2 !" this $eth!d w! ld0 !" c! rse0 -e that the E esti!nnaire w! ld -ec!$e very e3tensive, +here are practical i$plicati!n !" the "indings !" this research "!r individ als c!ncerned with $anaging their i$pressi!ns and "!r !rgani.iati!ns w!r2ing with pr!ject tea$s, Str!ng evidence was "! nd "!r the relati!n -etween p!sitive i$pressi!ns and in"l ence0 indicating the p!ssi-ility !" a ca sal lin2 -etween these i$pressi!ns and in"l ence, F!r individ als participating in a gr! p pr!ject0 -eing p!sitively eval ated -y their c!lleg es $ay have -ene"icial i$plicati!ns, I" individ als engage in i$pressi!n $anage$ent in a gr! p sit ati!n0 di""erent tactics see$ t! -e s cces" l than in a dyadic sit ati!n, &s n! signi"icant ! tc!$es were "! nd !n the relati!n -etween ingratiati!n and p!sitive interpers!nal ! tc!$es !n a gr! p level0 this see$s t! indicate that ingratiati!n see$s t! -e n!t as an e""ective tactic as e3pected, It is e3pected t! !nly -e e""ective i" sed with the necessary s2ill and with gr! p "act!rs0 li2e -ystander e""ects0 ta2en int! acc! nt, & pers!n sing ingratiati!n will "!r e3a$ple have t! ta2e int! acc! nt the e""ects !" his ingratiati!n atte$pt !n the !ther pe!ple present, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n !n the !ther hand appears t! -e a tactic that is relatively e""ective !n a gr! p level "!r creating p!sitive percepti!ns !" c!$petence and c!nseE ently in"l ence, +his $ight have i$plicati!ns "!r !rgani.ati!ns w!r2ing with pr!ject tea$s as it still has t! -e investigated i" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r can inter"ere with per"!r$ance, It is p!ssi-le that n!n*realistic i$pressi!ns created -y $eans !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n can lead t! increased in"l ence "!r the sel"*pr!$!ter, & res lt !" this can -e that a dispr!p!rtianate a$! nt !" in"l ence g!es t! individ als wh! are n!t the $!st c!$petent "!r the j!-, F rther$!re0 the ti$e and res! rces sed -y individ als "!r i$pressi!n $anage$ent $ay g! at the c!st !" ti$e and res! rces sed "!r the pr!ject tas2, ;.+ &ssumptions and limitations +he $!st i$p!rtant li$itati!ns !" this research can -e divided a$!ng the categ!ries !" $eas re$ent di""ic lties and generali.a-ility, Meas re$ent di""ic lties re"er t! the li$itati!ns !" $eas ring the nderlying c!nstr cts and varia-les with the $eth!ds that are * 70 * sed,
8enerali.a-ility re"ers t! the degree t! which the ! tc!$es !" the research retain their validity acr!ss vari! s c!nte3ts, &n i$p!rtant li$itati!n !" this research is that d e t! practical di""ic lties0 the sa$ple c!nsisted !nly ! t !" 67 resp!ndents, &cc!rding t! 4!hen 91977;0 i" an inter$ediate e""ect is e3pected0 at least 6> resp!ndents w! ld -e needed0 with an !" 0,0(0 t! !-tain a p!wer !" 0,>0, F!r a s$all e""ect0 61> resp!ndents w! ld -e needed, F!r c!rrelati!ns0 a large e""ect represents a c!rrelati!n !" at least 0,(00 "!r an inter$ediate e""ect it w! ld -e at least 0,60 and a s$all e""ect w! ld have a c!rrelati!n c!e""icient !" ar! nd 0,10, +his $eans that d e t! the li$ited si.e !" the sa$ple0 inter$ediate and s$all e""ects c! ld have -een !verseen in this research, +he i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics were $eas red -y !nly 7 E esti!ns each, +hese E esti!ns were stated n!t t!! speci"ic0 s! that the resp!ndents the$selves c! ld decide i" speci"ic -ehavi! rs they displayed d ring the gr! p pr!ject "ell nder the ite$s0 and they were stated n!t t!! general0 s! that -ehavi! rs that w! ld n!t "all nder the speci"ic i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic w! ld n!t -e $eas red -y the ite$s, /!wever0 -eca se i$pressi!n $anage$ent was $eas red as -ehavi! r and n!t as a trait !r tendency t! engage in sel"* presentati!ns0 it is p!ssi-le that the E esti!ns are n!t e3tensive1 it is p!ssi-le that they d! n!t c!ver the wh!le range !" -ehavi! rs that -el!ng nder an i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactic, #specially lac2ing in the ite$s is the se !" n!n*ver-al sel"*presentati!n -ehavi! r1 the ite$s al$!st e3cl sively re"er t! ver-al -ehavi! r, B!n*ver-al -ehavi! rs are an i$p!rtant aspect !" sel"*presentati!ns that can have a pr!"! nd i$pact !n i$pressi!ns, F!r e3a$ple0 Hris2ell0 Ol$stead0 and Salas 91996; "! nd that n!n*ver-al tas2 c es s ch as ver-al "l ency0 well* $!d lated v!ice t!ne0 -!dy p!st re0 and a rapid rate !" speech were p!sitively related with perceived c!$petence as well as with in"l ence, @iterat re !n s!cial $i$icry 94hartrand & %argh0 19991 van %aaren0 /!lland0 Steenaert0 & van :nippen-erg0 '006; and !n the lin2 -etween n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r and li2ing 94 rtis & Miller0 19>6; indicate that n!n*ver-al -ehavi! r can als! play a r!le in ingratiati!n, F!r e3a$ple0 a pleasant t!ne !" v!ice and $atching -!dy p!st res are predicted t! increase li2ing, +he E esti!nnaire !" %!lin! and + rnley 91999; was ch!sen -eca se "!r n!w it see$s t! -e the $!st statistically s! nd i$pressi!n $anage$ent E esti!nnaire that disting ishes -etween di""erent tactics, /!wever0 als! this E esti!nnaire has its i$per"ecti!ns and can -e i$pr!ved p!n, +he sel"*$!nit!ring c!ncept and the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !" the participants were $eas red sing sel"*rep!rt E esti!nnaires, +here"!re they are v lnera-le t! all li$itati!ns and wea2nesses that are related with this $eth!d !" data gathering, F!r sel"*rep!rt data t! -e * 71 *
acc rate0 participants have t! -e -!th willing and a-le t! answer the E esti!ns in a precise and h!nest way 9@arsen & % ss0 '00';, It $ st -e ass $ed that they have en! gh 2n!wledge !" the$selves and their -ehavi! r t! assess the$selves !n the ite$s !" the E esti!nnaire, F rther$!re0 it $ st -e ass $ed that the resp!ndents are willing t! give an acc rate pict re !" the$selves, Stevens and :rist!" 9199(; gave s!$e e$pirical s pp!rt "!r the validity !" applicantsG sel" rep!rts !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r, +hey c!llected i$pressi!n $anage$ent ratings "r!$ applicants0 interviewers0 and !-servers and "! nd that applicantsG ratings were $!re si$ilar t! the ratings !" the !-servers than the interviewersG ratings were, &n i$p!rtant c!$plicati!n with sel"*rep!rt $eas res !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent is s!cial desira-ility, S!cial desira-ility re"ers t! the tendency t! answer ite$s in s ch a way as t! c!$e acr!ss as s!cially attractive !r li2a-le 9@arsen & % ss0 '00';, %eca se0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent can -e seen as deceptive and illicit -ehavi! r 9Schlen2er & ?eig!ld0 199'1 =!nes0 1967;0 it is p!ssi-le that s!$e participants $ight c!nsider it as s!cially ndesira-le -ehavi! r0 and c!nseE ently play d!wn their sc!res !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics !n the ite$s, +his als! applies t! the sel"*$!nit!ring c!nstr ct which als! c!ntains several ite$s that can -e nderst!!d as $eas ring s! called FillicitG "!r$s !" s!cial -ehavi! r, F!r e3a$ple0 an ite$ li2e FI w! ld n!t change $y !pini!n 9!r the way I d! things; in !rder t! please s!$e!ne !r win their "av! r,G $ight -e at !dds with the s!cial val e !" displaying an acc rate pict re !" !nesel", /!wever0 Snyder 91977; "! nd that s!cial desira-ility0 as $eas red with the s!cial desira-ility scale !" 4r!wne and Marl!we 91960;0 was n!t str!ngly related with the c!ncept !" sel"*$!nit!ring, &n!ther di""ic lty in this research was the !perati!nali.ati!n !" the varia-le Fin"l enceG, %eca se0 it was i$p!ssi-le t! !-tain !-jective $eas res !" in"l ence0 a s -jective $eth!d was ch!sen in which the gr! p $e$-ers rated the in"l ence !" their c!*w!r2ers !n tw! E esti!ns with a "ive p!int scale, O-jectivity was increased -eca se the in"l ence sc!res !" the di""erent gr! p $e$-ers wh! rated a pers!n were averaged, /!wever0 it re$ains a s -jective $eas re$ent $eth!d and there"!re it can -e -iased -y the s -jective interpretati!n !" gr! p $e$-ersG assess$ent !" the sit ati!n, It is E esti!na-le i" gr! p $e$-ers are a-le t! acc rately assess the relative in"l ence !" their c!*w!r2ers, @evy0 4!llins0 and Bail 91999; identi"ied '7 di""erent types !" in"l ence in a review, +here"!re0 it is n!t clear i" all resp!ndents w! ld c!ncept ali.e in"l ence in the sa$e $anner, /!wever0 Salanci2 and 5"e""er 91977;0 -ased !n st dies !" !ver '0 very di""erent !rgani.ati!ns0 clai$ that individ als agree with each !ther t! a "ar e3tent and are a-le t! rate the$selves and peers !n a scale !"
* 7' *
in"l ence !r p!wer, +he 4r!n-achGs !" 0,91 "! nd "!r the scale0 see$s t! s pp!rt that the raters c!nsidera-ly agreed with each !ther in assessing the in"l ence !" their c!*w!r2ers, F rther$!re0 in the light !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 a gr! p $e$-er $ight c!ver p his in"l ence s! that his gr! p $e$-ers see hi$ as less in"l ential than he really is, On the !ther hand0 a gr! p $e$-er $ight try t! -e seen as $!re in"l ential while in reality he !nly has little in"l ence in the gr! p pr!cess, Finally0 the i$pressi!ns !" li2ea-ility and c!$petence !" the gr! p $e$-ers are rated -y tw! E esti!ns in the E esti!nnaire, It is n!t certain i" gr! p $e$-ers are willing t! rate their c!* w!r2ers negatively i" they have negative i$pressi!ns !" the$, #ven th! gh an!ny$ity was g aranteed0 resp!ndents $ight -e rel ctant t! give negative eval ati!ns a-! t their c!* w!r2ers, 4a ti!n sh! ld als! -e sed with generali.ing the res lts !" this research t! !ther settings, &s a st dent sa$ple was sed0 it is n!t straight"!rward that the sa$e res lts w! ld als! -e "! nd in a w!r2ing envir!n$ent, /ere "!r0 replicati!n in di""erent settings w! ld -e necessary t! see i" si$ilar e""ects w! ld h!ld in di""erent settings, F rther$!re0 the "act that the sa$ple c!nsisted ! t !" an al$!st e3cl sively $ale p!p lati!n0 li$its the generali.a-ility !" the "indings, First !" all0 -eca se signi"icant di""erences have -een "! nd in the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics -etween $ales and "e$ales 9%!lin! & + rnley0 '006;, F rther$!re0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics sed -y a "e$ale pers!n can have a di""erent e""ect than the sa$e tactic sed -y a $ale pers!n, :ipnis and Sch$idt 919>>;0 "!r e3a$ple0 "! nd that $ale $anagers sing high levels !" ingratiati!n0 received !nly $!derate per"!r$ance ratings0 while "e$ale ingratiat!rs received higher per"!r$ance ratings, +hird0 di""erences in the e""ect !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent can als! depend !n an interacti!n e""ect !" the gender !" the act!r and the gender !" the a dience, 4arli0 @aFle r0 and @!e-er 9199(; "! nd that li2a-leness was a $!re i$p!rtant deter$inant !" in"l ence "!r "e$ale than "!r $ale spea2ers when the a dience was $ale, Finally0 in $ale d!$inated w!r2 gr! p0 di""erent attit des t!ward i$pressi!n $anage$ent $ight e3ist than in gr! ps with $!re gender diversity,
* 76 *
4hapter >, 4!ncl si!n
0. (onclusion
+his research set ! t t! investigate the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent !n i$pressi!ns and in"l ence !n a gr! p level, I$pressi!n $anage$ent was st died at a gr! p level -eca se previ! s research "!c sed $ainly at pward i$pressi!n $anage$ent at a dyadic level, In !rgani.ati!ns0 h!wever0 i$pressi!ns are !"ten n!t given !"" in an is!lated !ne*t!*!ne interacti!n and n!t !nly t! pe!ple higher in hierarchy, #specially0 as gr! p and tea$ w!r2 -ec!$es $!re and $!re i$p!rtant in c!nte$p!rary !rgani.ati!ns0 it -ec!$es i$p!rtant t! als! st dy the e""ects !" sel"*presentati!ns in gr! ps, In line with previ! s res lts !" research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent0 it was hyp!thesised that the se !" ingratiati!n w! ld -e p!sitively related t! li2ing and c!nseE ently t! in"l ence in gr! p decisi!ns, It was drawn "r!$ e3pectati!ns states the!ry that the in"l ence a gr! p $e$-er is e3pected t! have0 is p!sitively related with the e3pectati!ns !" the !ther gr! p $e$-ers a-! t the a-ilities !" that pers!n t! c!ntri- te t! the gr! p g!als, &s res lts !n the a-ility !" gr! p $e$-ers t! assess the act al per"!r$ance !" their c!*w!r2ers were $i3ed0 it was e3pected that i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! rs w! ld play a r!le in "!r$ing the per"!r$ance e3pectati!ns !" the gr! p $e$-ers, +here"!re0 sel"*pr!$!ti!n was e3pected t! -e p!sitively related t! perceived c!$petence and c!nseE ently t! in"l ence, Sel"*$!nit!ring was e3pected t! -e a predict!r "!r the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics as well as "!r the e3pected s ccess !" these tactics, +he research c!nsisted ! t !" tw! sa$ples in which st dents w!r2ed t!gether in pr!ject tea$s t! create a "inal pr!ject, %y $eans !" E esti!nnaires0 in"!r$ati!n was gathered a-! t gr! p $e$-ersG i$pressi!n $anage$ent -ehavi! r0 a-! t i$pressi!ns gr! p $e$-ers had !" their c!*w!r2ers0 and !n the in"l ence !" gr! p $e$-ers, &lth! gh evidence was "! nd "!r a p!sitive relati!n -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and sel"*pr!$!ti!n0 n! evidence was "! nd that sel"*$!nit!ring $!derated the s ccess !" the i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics, It was "! nd that the se !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics did n!t signi"icantly predict in"l ence !ver and a-!ve the i$pressi!ns !" li2ing and in"l ence, /!wever0 s!$e evidence was "! nd that the tactic !" sel"*pr!$!ti!n was p!sitively related t! the p!sitive i$pressi!ns !" perceived c!$petence and li2ing while ingratiati!n was n!t, +hese "indings were e3plained -y p!inting t! the di""erences -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics sed in a dyadic as !pp!sed t! in a gr! p sit ati!n, In a gr! p0 creating a "av! ra-le i$pressi!n is $!re c!$ple3 than in a !ne*t!*!ne sit ati!n, Sel"*presentati!ns can
* 77 *
4hapter >, 4!ncl si!n
there"!re -e $!re di""ic lt i" given "!r a larger a dience, F rther$!re0 di""erent tactics $ay -e s ccess" l in a gr! p sit ati!n than in a dyadic interacti!n, +he ! tc!$es !" this research and the e3planati!ns that were given0 highlight s!$e -lan2 sp!ts in i$pressi!n $anage$ent research, First !" all0 i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics are e3pected t! have di""erent e""ects !n di""erent $e$-ers !" the a dience0 especially as s!$e tactic are targeted at speci"ic individ als in the a dience, /ere "!re0 t! st dy the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent tactics in a gr! p sit ati!n0 a s!cial relati!ns $!del c! ld -e sed in !rder t! investigate the di""erent e""ects !" tactics !n the di""erent gr! p $e$-ers, F rther$!re0 "!r " t re research it $ight -e interesting t! ta2e a dyna$ic appr!ach in st dying the relati!n -etween i$pressi!n $anage$ent and its ! tc!$es, +he!ries !" gr! p devel!p$ent predict changing relati!ns -etween c!*w!r2ers d ring the devel!p$ent !" a gr! p, Sel"*presentati!ns $ight have di""erent e""ects in di""erent devel!p$ent stages and there"!re research !n i$pressi!n $anage$ent in gr! ps $ay -ene"it "r!$ a dyna$ic appr!ach t! st dying the e""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent,
* 7( *
4hapter 9, Ae"erences
:. 2eferences
&-els!n0 A,5, 19>1, +he psych!l!gical stat s !" the script c!ncept, $merican 6sychologist, 66) 71(*7'9, &r2in0 A,M,0 & Shepperd0 =,&, 19>9, Sel"*presentati!n styles in !rgani.ati!ns, In 8iacal!ne0 A,&,0 A!sen"eld0 5, 9#ds,;0 Impression 'anagement in the 9rgani:ation0 /illsdale0 Bew =ersey) @awrence #rl-a $ ass!ciates0 1'(*169, &rr!w0 /, 1997, Sta-ility0 -ista-ility0 and insta-ility in s$all gr! p in"l ence patterns, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 7') 7(*>(, &sch0 S,#, 19((, Opini!ns and s!cial press re, In Staw0 %, 9#d,;0 '007, 6sychological #imensions of 9rgani:ational (ehavior0 Upper Saddle Aiver) 5ears!n0 '61*'67, &vis!n0 ?,A, 19>0, @i2ing and the attri- ti!n !" ca sati!n "!r s ccess and "ail re, ;ournal of <eneral 6sychology, 10') 197*'09, %ales0 A,F, 19(6, +as2 stat s and li2ea-ility as a " ncti!n !" tal2ing and listening in decisi!n $a2ing gr! ps, In ?hite0 @,H, 9#d,;0 &he "tate of "ocial "ciences0 4hicag!0 I@) University !" 4hicag! 5ress0 17>*161, %and ra0 &, 1997, "elf-efficacy: &he !ercise of )ontrol, Bew D!r2) Free$an, %ar!n0 A,M,0 & :enny0 H,&,0 19>6, +he $!derat!r*$ediat!r varia-le distincti!n in s!cial psych!l!gical research) c!ncept0 strategic0 and statistical c!nsiderati!ns, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (1) 1176*11>', %a $eister0 A,F, 19>9, M!tives and c!sts !" sel"*presentati!n in !rgani.ati!ns, In 8iacal!ne0 A,&,0 & A!sen"eld0 5, 9#ds,;0 Impression 'anagement in the 9rgani:ation. /illsdale0 Bew =ersey) @awrence #rl-a $ ass!ciates0 (7*71, %erger0 =,0 Fise20 M,/,0 B!r$an0 A,C,0 & Celditch0 M, 1977, "tatus )haracteristics and "ocial Interaction: $n !pectation-"tates $pproach. Bew D!r2) #lsevier Scienti"ic 5 -lishing 4!$pany0 Inc, %!hra0 :,&,0 & 5andey0 =, 19>7, Ingratiati!n t!wards strangers0 "riends0 and -!sses, ;ournal of "ocial 6sychology, 1'7) '17*''', %!lin!0 M,4,0 & + rnley0 ?,/, 1999, Meas ring i$pressi!n $anage$ent in !rgani.ati!ns) a scale devel!p$ent -ased !n the =!nes and 5itt$an ta3!n!$y, 9rgani:ational %esearch 'ethods0 ') 1>7*'06, %!lin!0 M,4,0 & + rnley0 ?,/, '006, M!re than !ne way t! $a2e an i$pressi!n) e3pl!ring pr!"iles !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent, ;ournal of 'anagement, '9) 171*160, %!nner0 %,@, '007, #3pertise in gr! p pr!-le$ s!lving) rec!gniti!n0 s!cial c!$-inati!n0 and per"!r$ance, <roup #ynamics: &heory, %esearch, and 6ractice, 7) '77*'90,
* 76 *
%yrne0 H, 1971, &he $ttraction 6aradigm. Bew D!r2) &cade$ic 5ress, %rass0 H,=,0 & % r2hardt0 M,#, 1996, 5!tential p!wer and p!wer se) an investigati!n !" str ct re and -ehavi!r, $cademy of 'anagement ;ournal, 66) 771*770, %riggs0 S,A,0 & 4hee20 =,M, 19>>, On the nat re !" sel"*$!nit!ring) pr!-le$s !" assess$ent0 pr!-le$s with validity, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (7) 666*67>, 4a$p-ell0 =,H,0 & Fehr0 %,&, 1990, Sel"*estee$ and percepti!ns !" c!nveyed i$pressi!ns) is negativity a""ectively ass!ciated with greater realis$< ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (>) 1''*1'6, 4arli0 @,@,0 @aFle r0 S,=,0 & @!e-er0 4,4, 199(, B!nver-al -ehavi!r0 gender0 and in"l ence, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 6>) 1060*1071, 4hartrand0 +,@,0 & %argh0 =,&, 1999, +he cha$ele!n e""ect) +he percepti!n*-ehavi!r lin2 and s!cial interacti!n, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 76) >96*910, 4hee20 =,M,0 & % ss0 &,/, 19>1, Shyness and s!cia-ility, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 71) 660*669, 4hristie0 A,0 & 8eis0 F,@, 1970, "tudies in 'achiavellianism. Bew D!r2) &cade$ic 5ress, 4!hen0 =, 1977, "tatistical 6ower $nalysis for the (ehavioural "ciences. Bew D!r2) &cade$ic 5ress, 4!hen0 S,8,0 & %ailey0 H,#, 1997, ?hat $a2es tea$s w!r2) gr! p e""ectiveness research "r!$ the sh!p "l!!r t! the e3ec tive s ite, ;ournal of management0 '6) '69*'90, 4ran!0 ?,H, '000, Milest!nes in the psych!l!gical analysis !" s!cial in"l ence, <roup #ynamics: &heory, %esearch, and 6ractice0 7) 6>*>0. 4r!wne0 H,5,0 & Marl!we0 H, 1960, & new scale !" s!cial desira-ility independent !" psych!path!l!gy, ;ournal of )onsulting and )linical 6sychology, '7) 679*6(7, 4si2s.ent$ihalyi0 M, 1999, I" we are s! rich0 why arenGt we happy< $merican 6sychologist0 (7) >'1*>'7, 4 rtis0 A,4,0 & Miller0 :, 19>6, %elieving an!ther li2es !r disli2es y! ) -ehavi!rs $a2ing the -elie" c!$e tr e, ;ournal of 6ersonality and 6ersonal 6sychology0 (1) '>7* '90, He5a l!0 %,M, 199', B!nver-al %ehavi!r and Sel"*5resentati!n, 6sychological (ulletin, 111) '06*'76, Hepa l!0 %,M,0 /!!ver0 4,?,0 ?e--0 ?,0 :enny0 H,&,0 & Oliver0 5,V, 19>7, &cc racy !" pers!n percepti!n) d! pe!ple :n!w what 2inds !" i$pressi!ns they c!nvey< ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, ('0 606*61(,
* 77 *
He tsch0 M,0 & 8erard0 /,%, 19((, & st dy !" n!r$ative and in"!r$ati!nal s!cial in"l ence p!n individ al j dge$ent, ;ournal of $bnormal and "ocial 6ychology, (1) 6'9*666, Hris2ell0 =,#,0 Ol$stead0 %,0 & Salas0 #, 1996, +as2 c es0 d!$inance c es0 and in"l ence in tas2 gr! ps, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology, 7>) (1*60, #agly0 &,/,0 & :ara 0 S,=, 1991 8ender and the e$ergence !" leaders) a $eta*analysis, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 60) 6>(*710, Feld$an0 A,S,0 F!rrest0 =,&,0 & /app0 %,A, '00', Sel"*presentati!n and ver-al decepti!n) d! sel"*presenters lie $!re< (asic and $pplied "ocial 6sychology, '7) 166*171, Field0 &, '000, #iscovering "tatistics: =sing "6"" for >indows. @!nd!n) Sage 5 -licati!n, Finch0 =,F,0 & 4ialdini0 A,%, 19>9, &n!ther indirect tactic !" 9sel"*; i$age $anage$ent) %!!sting, 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology (ulletin, 1() '''*'6', Fletcher0 8,=,O,0 Hanil!vics0 5,0 Fernande.0 8,0 5eters!n0 H,0 & Aeeder0 8,H, 19>6, &ttri- ti!nal c!$ple3ity ) an individ al di""erence $eas re, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (1) >7(*>>7, French0 =,0 & Aaven0 %,/, 19(9, +he -ases !" s!cial p!wer, In H, 4artwright 9#d.?, "tudies of "ocial 6ower. &nn &r-!r0 MI) Instit te "!r S!cial Aesearch0 1(0*167, 8angestad0 S,?,0 & Snyder0 M, '000, Sel"*$!nit!ring) appraisal and reappraisal, 6sychological (ulletin, 1'6) (60*(((, 8ardner0 ?,@,0 & Martin2!0 M,=, 19>>, I$pressi!n Manage$ent in !rgani.ati!ns, ;ournal of 'anagement, 17) 6'1*66>, 8ersic20 4,=, 19>9, Mar2ing ti$e) predicta-le transiti!ns in tas2 gr! ps, $cademy of 'anagement ;ournal, 61) 9*71, 8iacal!ne0 A,&,0 & A!sen"eld0 5, 19>6, Sel"*presentati!n and sel"*pr!$!ti!n in an !rgani.ati!nal setting, ;ournal of "ocial 6sychology, 1'6) 6'1*6'6, 8ilder de0 H, 1991, !pectation "tates &heory: "ome Investigations >ithin and (eyond a %esearch &radition. H!ct!rate thesis) Aij2s niversiteit 8r!ningen, 8!d"rey0 H,:,, =!nes0 #,#,0 & @!rd0 4, 8, 19>6, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n is n!t ingratiating, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (0) 106*11(, 8!""$an0 #, 19(9, &he 6resentation of "elf in H! -leday &nch!r, veryday 4ive, 8arden 4ity0 Bew D!r2)
8!rd!n0 A,&, 1996, I$pact !" ingratiati!n !n j dge$ents !" eval ati!ns) a $eta analytical investigati!n, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 71) (7*70, 8! ldner0 &,?, 1960, +he n!r$ !" recipr!city) & preli$inary state$ent, $merican "ociological %eview, '() 161*17>,
* 7> *
8 erin0 %, 1991, &nticipating the c!nseE ences !" s!cial -ehavi! r, )urrent 6sychology: %esearch and %eviews, 10) 161*16', /are0 &,5, 1997, A!les and relati!nships, In /are0 &,5,0 %l $-erg0 /,/,0 Havies0 M,F, & :ent0 V, 9#ds,; "mall <roup %esearch a *andbook, B!rw!!d0 Bew =ersey) &-le3 5 -lishing 4!rp!rati!n0 171*1(7, /enry0 A,&,0 Stric2land0 O,=,0 D!rges0 S,@,0 & @add0 H, 1996, /elping gr! ps deter$ine their $!st acc rate $e$-er) the r!le !" ! tc!$e "eed-ac2, ;ournal of $pplied "ocial 6sychology, '6) 11(6*1170, /iggins0 4,&,0 = dge0 +,&,0 & Ferris0 8,A, '006, In"l ence tactics and w!r2 ! tc!$es) a $eta analysis, ;ournal of 9rgani:ational (ehaviour, '7) >9*106, =a$es0 ?, 1>90, &he 6rinciples of 6sychology, @!nd!n) Mac$illan, =anis0 I,@, 1971, 8r! pthin20 In /ac2$an0 =,A, 9#d,;0 19>6, 6erspectives on (ehavior in 9rgani:ations0 Bew D!r2) Mc8raw*/ill0 66) 67>*6>(, =!hn0 O,5,0 4hee20 =,M,0 & :l!hnen0 #,4, 1996, On the nat re !" sel"*$!nit!ring) c!nstr ct e3plicati!n with S*s!rt ratings, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 71) 766*776, =!nes0 #,#, 1967, Ingratiation: $ "ocial 6sychological $nalysis. Bew D!r2 ) &pplet!n* 4ent ry*4r!"ts, =!nes0 #,#,0 & 5itt$an0 +,S, 19>', t!ward a general the!ry !" strategic sel"*presentati!n, In S ls0 =, 9#d,;, 6sychological 6erspectives on the "elf, /illsdale Bew =ersey) #rl-a $0 1) '61* '61, = v!nen0 =,0 & M rd!c20 +,%, 1996, /!w t! pr!$!te s!cial appr!val) e""ects !" a dience and achieve$ent ! tc!$e !n p -licly c!$$ nicated attri- ti!ns, ;ournal of ducational 6sychology, >() 66(*676, :ane0 =,S,0 & @awler0 #,#, 197>, Meth!ds !" peer assess$ent, 6sychological (ulletin, >(0 (((*(>6, :ent0 M,V, 1997, +he presence !" !thers, In /are0 &,5,0 %l $-erg0 /,/,0 Havies0 M,F,0 & :ent0 M,V, 9#ds,;0 "mall <roup %esearch: a *andbook0 B!rw!!d0 Bew =ersey) &-le3 5 lishing 4!rp!rati!n0 >1*10(, :ent0 A,@,0 & M!ss0 S,#, 1990, Sel"*$!nit!ring as a predict!r !" leader e$ergence, 6sychological %eports, 66) >7(*>>1, :ild ""0 M, & Hay0 H,V,0 1997, H! cha$ele!ns get ahead< +he e""ects !" sel"*$!nit!ring !n $anagerial careers, $cademy of 'anagement ;ournal, 67) 1077*1060, :ipnis0 H, & Sch$idt0 S,M, 19>>, Upward in"l ence styles) relati!nship with per"!r$ance eval ati!ns0 salary0 and stress, $dministrative "cience @uarterly, 66) ('>*(7',
* 79 *
:ipnis0 H,0 Sch$idt0 S,M,0 & ?il2ins!n0 I, 19>0, Intra!rgani.ati!nal in"l ence tactics) e3pl!rati!ns in getting !neGs way, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology0 6() 770*7(', :!l-0 =,&, 199>, +he relati!nship -etween sel"*$!nit!ring and leadership in st dent pr!ject gr! ps, &he ;ournal of (usiness )ommunication, 6() '67*'>', :!!lschijn0 8, 1996, 6lato: #e "triAd &egen het #emocratisch (eest. &$sterda$) O!ievaar, @arsen0 A,=,0 & % ss H,M, '00'. 6ersonality 6sychology: #omains of Knowledge about *uman Nature. Bew D!r2) Mc8raw*/ill 4!$panies0 Inc, @atanI0 %, 19>1, +he psych!l!gy !" s!cial i$pact, $merican 6sychologist, 66) 676*6(6, @eary0 M, A, 199(, "elf-presentation: Impression 'anagement and Interpersonal (ehaviour0 H - E e) %r!wn & %ench$ar2, @eary0 M, A,0 & :!wals2i0 A,M, 1990, I$pressi!n $anage$ent) a literat re review and tw!* c!$p!nent $!del, 6sychological (ulletin0 107) 67*67, @evine0 =,M,0 & M!reland0 A,@, 1990, 5r!gress in s$all gr! p research. $nnual %eview of 6sychology, 71) (>(*667, @evy0 H,&,0 4!llins0 %,#,0 & Bail0 5,A, 1999, & new $!del !" interpers!nal in"l ence characteristics, ;ournal of "ocial (ehavior and 6ersonality, 16) 71(*766, @i--y0 A,0 +r!t$an0 :,+,0 & Ci$$er0 I, 19>7, Me$-er variati!n0 rec!gniti!n !" e3pertise0 and gr! p per"!r$ance, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology, 7') >1*>7, @ittlepage0 8,#,0 Sch$idt0 8,?,0 ?hisler0 #,?,0 & Fr!st0 &,8, 199(, &n inp t*pr!cess*! tp t analysis !" in"l ence and per"!r$ance in pr!-le$*s!lving gr! ps, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 69) >77*>>9, Marc s0 H,:, 199>, St dying gr! p dyna$ics with the s!cial relati!ns $!del, <roup #ynamics: &heory, %esearch, and 6ractice, ') '60*'70, Mar2 s0 /,0 & B ri s0 5,0 19>6, 5!ssi-le selves, $merican 6sychologist, 71) 9(7*969, M!sc!vici0 S, 19>(, S!cial in"l ence and c!n"!r$ity0 In) 8, @ind.ey and #, &r!ns!n 9eds,; &he *andbook of "ocial 6sychology 96th editi!n;0 Bew D!r2) Aand!$ /! se0 61>* 6'6, Myers0 H,8, '00', "ocial 6sychology0 Bew D!r2) Mc8raw*/ill, Be $ann0 A,0 Strac20 F, '000, KM!!d c!ntagi!nL) the a t!$atic trans"er !" $!!d -etween pers!ns, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 79) '11*''6, Bg0 S,/, '001, In"l encing thr! gh the p!wer !" lang age, In F!rgas0 =,5,0 :ipling0 5,?, 9#ds,;0 "ocial Influence: #irect and Indirect 6rocesses, 5hiladelphia) 5sych!l!gy 5ress0 1>(* 197,
* >0 *
5a lh s0 H,@, 19>7, +w! c!$p!nent $!del !" s!cially desira-le resp!nding, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 76) (9>*609, 5"e""er0 =, 19>1, Manage$ent as sy$-!lic acti!n) +he creati!n and $aintenance !" !rgani.ati!nal paradig$s, In @,@, 4 $$ings & %,M, Staw 9#ds,;0 %esearch in 9rgani:ational (ehavior, 8reenwich0 4+) =&I 5ress, >1*10( Ae$$erswaal0 =, 199>, *andboek <roepsdynamica, een Nieuwe Inleiding op &heorie en 6raktiAk, %aarn) /, Belissen %,V,, A!--ins0 S,5, '006,0 ssentials of 9rgani:ational (ehaviour, 1th edition. Bew =ersey0 Upper Saddle Aiver) 5rentice /all, A!sen"eld0 5,0 8iacal!ne0 A,&,0 & Ai!rdan0 4,&, 199(, Impression 'anagement in 9rgani:ations: &heory. 'easurement, 6ractice0 @!nd!n) A! tledge, A!sen"eld0 5,0 8iacal!ne0 A,&,0 & +edeschi0 =,+, 19>6, / $!r and i$pressi!n $anage$ent, &he Aournal of "ocial 6sychology, 1'1) (9*66, A!th0 H,@,0 /arris0 A,B,0 & Snyder0 4,A, 19>>, &n individ al di""erence $eas re !" attri- tive and rep diative tactics !" "av! ra-le sel"*presentati!n, ;ournal of "ocial and )linical 6sychology, 6) 1(9*170, A d$an0 @,&, 199>, Sel"*pr!$!ti!n as a ris2 "act!r "!r w!$en) the c!sts and -ene"its !" c! nterstere!typical i$pressi!n $anage$ent, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 77) 6'9*67(, Salanci20 8,A,0 & 5"e""er0 =, 1977, ?h! gets p!wer and h!w they h!ld !n t! it) & strategic* c!ntingency $!del !" p!wer, 9rgani:ational #ynamics0 ?inter) 6*'1 Schlen2er0 %,A, 197(, Sel"*presentati!n) $anaging the i$pressi!n !" c!nsistency when reality inter"eres with sel"*enhance$ent, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 6')1060* 1067, Schlen2er0 %,A, 19>0, Impression 'anagement: the "elf-concept, "ocial Identity and Interpersonal %elations. M!nterey0 4&) %r!!2sQ4!le, Schlen2er0 %,A,0 & %ritt0 +,?, 1999, %ene"icial i$pressi!n $anage$ent) strategically c!ntr!lling in"!r$ati!n t! help "riends, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 76) ((9*(76, Schlen2er0 %,A,0 & ?eig!ld0 M,F, 199', Interpers!nal pr!cesses inv!lving i$pressi!n reg lati!n and $anage$ent, $nnual %eview of 6sychology, 76) 166*16>, Schneider0 H,=, 19>1, +actical sel"*presentati!ns) t!ward a -r!ader c!ncepti!n0 In +edeschi0 =,+, 9#d,; Impression 'anagement &heory and "ocial 6sychological %esearch, Bew D!r2) &cade$ic 5ress Inc0 '6*70, Sedi2ides0 4, 1996, &ssess$ent0 enhance$ent0 and veri"icati!n) deter$inants !" the sel"* eval ati!n pr!cess, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 6(0 617*66>,
* >1 *
Sheri"0 M, 196(, & st dy !" s!$e s!cial "act!rs in percepti!n, $rchives of 6sychology0 '7) 1* 60, Snyder0 M, 1977, Sel"*$!nit!ring !" e3pressive -ehavi!r, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 60) ('6*(67, Snyder0 M,0 & 8angestad0 S, 19>6, On the nat re !" sel"*$!nit!ring) $atters !" assess$ent0 $atters !" validity, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, (1) 1'(*169, Stevens0 4,:,0 & :rist!"0 &,@, 199(, Ma2ing the right i$pressi!n) a "ield st dy !" applicant i$pressi!n $anage$ent d ring j!- interviews, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology, >0) (>7*606, Stry2er0 S, 19>0, "ymbolic Interactionism: a "ocial "tructural Bersion. Menl! 5ar20 4ali"!rnia) %enja$inQ4 $$ings, Swann0 ?,%, 1996, "elf-traps: &he Free$an, lusive @uest for *igher "elf-esteem. Bew D!r2)
+edeschi0 =,+,0 & Mel- rg0 V, 19>7, I$pressi!n $anage$ent and in"l ence in the !rgani.ati!n, In S,%, %acharach & #, =, @awler 9#ds,;0 %esearch in the "ociology of 9rgani:ations0 8reenwich0 4+) =&I 5ress0 6) 61*(>, +edeschi0 =,+,0 & Aeiss0 M, 19>1, Identities0 the phen!$enal sel"0 and la-!rat!ry research0 In +edeschi0 =,+, 9#d,;0 Impression 'anagement &heory and "ocial 6sychological %esearch0 Bew D!r2) &cade$ic 5ress Inc0 6*'', +!rrance0 #,5, 19((, S!$e c!nseE ences !" p!wer di""erences !n decisi!n $a2ing in per$anent and te$p!rary three*$an gr! ps0 In /are0 &,5,0 %!rgatta0 #,F,0 & %ales0 A,F, 9#ds,;0 "mall groups: "tudies in "ocial Interaction0 Bew D!r2) :n!p"0 7>'*79', +riplett0 B, 1>9>, +he dyna$!genic "act!rs in pace$a2ing and c!$petiti!n, $merican ;ournal of 6sychology0 9) (07*(66, + c2$an0 %,?, 196(, Hevel!p$ental seE ences in s$all gr! ps, 6sychology (ulletin0 66) 6>7*699, + rnley0 ?,/,0 & %!lin!0 M,4, '001, &chieving desired i$ages while av!iding ndesired i$ages) e3pl!ring the r!le !" sel"*$!nit!ring in i$pressi!n $anage$ent, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology, >6) 6(1*660, Van %aaren0 A,%,0 /!lland0 A,?,0 Steenaert0 %,0 & van :nippen-erg0 &, '006, Mi$icry "!r $!ney) -ehavi! ral c!nseE ences !" i$itati!n, ;ournal of !perimental "ocial 6sychology, 69) 696*69>, V!hs0 :,H,0 %a $eister0 A,F,0 & 4iar!cc!0 B,=, '00(, Sel"*reg lati!n and sel"*presentati!n) reg lat!ry res! rce depleti!n i$pairs i$pressi!n $anage$ent and e""!rt" l sel"*presentati!n depletes reg lat!ry res! rces, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, >>) 66'*6(7,
* >' *
V!n20 A, '00', Sel"*serving interpretati!ns !" "lattery) why ingratiati!n w!r2s, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, >') (1(*('6, ?ayne0 S,=,0 & Ferris 8,A, 1990, In"l ence tactics0 a""ect0 and e3change E ality in s pervis!r* s -!rdinate interacti!ns) & la-!rat!ry e3peri$ent and "ield st dy, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology, 7() 7>7*799, ?ayne0 S,=,0 & @iden0 A,4, 199(, #""ects !" i$pressi!n $anage$ent !n per"!r$ance ratings) a l!ngit dinal st dy, $cademy of 'anagement ;ournal, 1) '6'*'60, ?ic2l nd0 A,&, 19>0, 8r! p c!ntact and sel"*"!c sed attenti!n0 In 5a l s0 5,%, 9#d,;0 6sychology of <roup Influence. /illsdale Bew =ersey) @awrence #rl-a $ &ss!ciates0 1>9* '0>, D 2l0 8,0 & Fal-e0 4, 1990, In"l ence tactics and !-jectives in pward0 d!wnward0 and lateral in"l ence atte$pts, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology0 7() 16'*170, D 2l0 8,0 & +racy0 =,%, 199', 4!nseE ences !" in"l ence tactics sed with s -!rdinates0 peers0 and the -!ss, ;ournal of $pplied 6sychology0 77) ('(*(6(, Caj!nc0 A,%, 196(, S!cial Facilitati!n, "cience, 179 )'69*'77, Canna0 M,5,0 & 5ac20 S,=, 197(, On the sel"*" l"illing nat re !" apparent se3 di""erences in -ehavi!r, ;ournal of !perimental "ocial 6sychology, 11) (>6*(91, C c2er$an0 M,0 /all0 =,&,0 HeFran20 A,S,0 & A!senthal0 A, 1976, #nc!ding and dec!ding !" sp!ntane! s and p!sed "acial e3pressi!ns, ;ournal of 6ersonality and "ocial 6sychology, 67) 966*977,
* >6 *
4hapter 10, &ppendi3
*<. &ppendi=
Duestionnaire on Group Cehaviour
F!r $y $aster thesis0 as a st dent at the Fd#?% at the University !" Maastricht0 I carry ! t a research !n the -ehavi! r !" gr! p $e$-ers in w!r2 gr! ps, I w! ld li2e t! as2 y! "!r y! r c!!perati!n in gathering data "!r this research, /ere "!re I as2 y! t! "ill in this E esti!nnaire, +he "!ll!wing pages c!ntain s!$e E esti!ns, 5lease read every E esti!n care" lly and try t! answer the$ directly with! t l!sing t!! $ ch ti$e, +here are n! g!!d !r -ad s!l ti!ns, +he E esti!ns $ st -e answered -y encircling the n $-er that see$s $!st applica-le, &nswer the E esti!ns privately with! t disc ssing the$ with y! r c!*w!r2ers, +he "irst three pages c!ntain E esti!ns a-! t y! rsel", +he last pages c!ntain E esti!ns a-! t y! r gr! p $e$-ers, 5lease "ill the$ in "!r all y! r gr! p $e$-ers, &ll data will -e treated c!n"identially, +han2 y! very $ ch0 Sjir Uitdewilligen ?ame: &ge: ?ationalit/: Gender 5"lease encircle the correct answer6: Male Fe$ale
I" y! are interested in the res lts !" this research0 y! can "ill in y! r e*$ail address, !mail address:
6lease indicate how much you agree with the following statements:
"otall# disagree $isagree Ne%tral &gree "otall# agree
1, I "ind it hard t! i$itate the -ehavi! r !" !ther pe!ple, ', &t parties and s!cial gatherings0 I d! n!t atte$pt t! d! !r say things that !thers will li2e, 6, I can !nly arg e "!r ideas which I already -elieve, 7, I can $a2e instant speeches even !n t!pics a-! t which I have al$!st n! in"!r$ati!n, (, I g ess I p t !n a sh!w t! i$press !r entertain pe!ple, 6, I w! ld pr!-a-ly $a2e a g!!d act!r, 7, In a gr! p !" pe!ple I a$ rarely the center !" attenti!n, >, In di""erent sit ati!ns and with di""erent pe!ple0 I !"ten act li2e very di""erent pers!ns, 9, I a$ n!t partic larly g!!d at $a2ing !ther pe!ple li2e $e, 10, IT$ n!t always the pers!n I appear t! -e, 11, I w! ld n!t change $y !pini!ns 9!r the way I d! things; in !rder t! please s!$e!ne !r win their "av!r, 1', I have c!nsidered -eing an entertainer, 16, I have never -een g!!d at w!rd g essing ga$es !r i$pr!visi!nal acting,
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
17, I have tr! -le changing $y -ehavi!r t! s it di""erent pe!ple and di""erent sit ati!ns, 1(, &t a party I let !thers 2eep the j!2es and st!ries g!ing, 16, I "eel a -it aw2ward in c!$pany and d! n!t sh!w p E ite as well as I sh! ld, 17, I can l!!2 any!ne in the eye and tell a lie with a straight "ace 9i" "!r a right end;, 1>, I $ay deceive pe!ple -y -eing "riendly when I really disli2e the$,
1
"otall# disagree
5
"otall# agree
$isagree
Ne%tral
&gree
6lease indicate how accurate each statement is in describing your behaviour during the group proAect.
'er# (nacc%rate (nacc%rate Ne%tral &cc%rate 'er# acc%rate
1, Ma2e !ther gr! p $e$-ers aware !" y! r talents !r E ali"icati!ns, ', Ma2e !ther gr! p $e$-ers aware !" y! r niE e s2ills and a-ilities, 6, @et !ther gr! p $e$-ers 2n!w that y! are a val a-le $e$-er !" the gr! p, 7, +al2 pr! dly a-! t y! r past acc!$plish$ents which $ight help $a2e this pr!ject s ccess" l, (, 5raise y! r gr! p $e$-ers "!r their e""!rts s! that they will c!nsider y! a nice pers!n, 6, 4!$pli$ent y! r gr! p $e$-ers s! they will see y! as li2ea-le, 7, H! pers!nal "av!rs "!r $e$-ers !" the gr! p t! sh!w the$ that y! are "riendly, >, +a2e an interest in !ther gr! p $e$-ersT pers!nal lives t! sh!w the$ that y! are "riendly,
Please fill in the names of your group members and answer the following questions about all of them .
?ame of group mem'er *:

I li2e this pers!n, I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2, ?ame of group mem'er +:
"otall# disagree
$isagree
Ne%tral
&gree
"otall# agree
I li2e this pers!n, I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2, ?ame of group mem'er ):
1
"otall# disagree
2
$isagree
3
Ne%tral
4
&gree
5
"otall# agree
I li2e this pers!n, I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2,
?ame of group mem'er ,:

I li2e this pers!n, I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2, ?ame of group mem'er -:
"otall# disagree
$isagree
Ne%tral
&gree
"otall# agree
I li2e this pers!n,
I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2,
?ame of group mem'er 1:

I li2e this pers!n, I w! ld li2e t! w!r2 with this pers!n again !n an!ther gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has a l!t !" in"l ence !n gr! p decisi!ns, I" this pers!n $a2es a s ggesti!n0 it gets accepted -y the !ther $e$-ers !" the gr! p, +his pers!n is c!$petent c!ncerning the gr! p tas2, +his pers!n has g!t the necessary e3pertise "!r this gr! p tas2,

Impression Management Tactics and Group Influence

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Impression Management Tactics and Group Influence

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Deze scriptie is afkomstig van: http://www.studentenonderzoek.com & http://www.studiosus.

nl, Online Scripties & Verslagen

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter 1, Intr!d cti!n

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter 1, Intr!d cti!n

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter 1, Intr!d cti!n

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

sed in resp!nse t! p!!r per"!r$ances0 while

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns

4hapter ', +he!retical -ac2gr! nd

I$pressi!n Manage$ent in 8r! p Sit ati!ns