Anger and advancement versus sadness and subjugation: the effect of negative emotion expressions on social status conferral.

By Larissa Z. Tiedens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001

814 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bb6e3394cfd27199c01e45df0b4edd459fe651b7

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

ON WHY “EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE” WILL NOT PREDICT LEADERSHIP EFFECTIVENESS BEYOND IQ OR THE “BIG FIVE”: AN EXTENSION AND REJOINDER (2004, background): “I challenged this position stating that charisma is based on emotional appeals that might include anger, disgust, and so forth (Antonakis, 2003; see also Tiedens, 2001, who found that displays of anger were associated with leadership status).”
Portrait of The Angry Decision Maker: How Appraisal Tendencies Shape Anger's Influence on Cognition. (2006, background): “For example, Tiedens (2001b) found that people induced to feel anger made inferences about others’ motives based on their chronically accessible scripts whereas people induced to feel sadness seemed to consider more alternatives.”
The Social Consequences of Voice: An Examination of Voice Type and Gender on Status and Subsequent Leader Emergence (2017, background): “This is consequential because individuals who stir negative emotionsmay not be conferred status to the same degree as those who engender positive emotions (Lovaglia & Houser, 1996; Tiedens, 2001).”
Nonprofits are seen as warm and for-profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter (2010, neutral): “DOI: 10.1086/651566”
Power moves: complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. (2003, background): “Other research has shown that when people display dominant nonverbal behavior, not only do others think they are stronger and more competent (Keating, 1985), but also that they deserve to hold higher status positions (Tiedens, 2001).”
Silenced by fear:: The nature, sources, and consequences of fear at work (2009, background): “For low status employees, this threshold is probably lower than it is for high status employees because of perceived differences in the legitimacy of unrestricted expression (Geddes & Callister, 2007; Tiedens, 2001).”
Rocking the Boat but Keeping It Steady: The Role of Emotion Regulation in Employee Voice (2013, background): “When employees succeed in marshaling anger, they send signals of competence and status (Tiedens, 2001), which may motivate managers to take their ideas more seriously and ultimately benefit from implementing them.”
The Evolutionary Significance of Affect in Groups: Communication and Group Bonding (2004, background): “Tiedens (2001) also found that targets who are described as angry were judged to have higher status and to be more worthy of a job promotion, while targets who were described as sad or guilty were judged to be lower in status.”
Just Feelings? The Role of Affect in the Formation of Organizational Fairness Judgments (2011, background): “This pattern is apparently due to the greater use of chronically accessible scripts (Tiedens, 2001) and the reliance on fewer diagnostic cues (Lerner et al., 1998) associated with anger.”
Why Do People Regulate Their Emotions? A Taxonomy of Motives in Emotion Regulation (2016, background): “For instance, because anger confers higher social status, it can sometimes elicit positive evaluations from others (e.g., Tiedens, 2001).”
Social influences on the emotion process (2003, background): “Anger expressions, for example, serve to restore the power balance in a relationship (e.g., Averill, 1982; Tiedens, 2001); smiling evokes sympathy from others, but may also signal powerlessness (LaFrance, Hecht, & Paluck, 2003); blushing signals a decrease in trustworthiness (De Jong, Peters, De…”
A Reciprocal Influence Model of Social Power: Emerging Principles and Lines of Inquiry (2008, background): “(for notable recent exceptions, see Copeland, 1994; Guinote et al., 2002; Overbeck and Park, 2001; Tiedens, 2001; Van Kleef et al., 2006; Vescio et al., 2003).”
Seeing power in action: The roles of deliberation, implementation, and action in inferences of power (2009, background): “This logic based on control is similar to the notion that people who make internal attributions for negative outcomes signal that they have control over environmental factors and thus have more power than people who focus on external attributions (Lee & Tiedens, 2001).”