Struthers, C. Ward2015-01-262015-01-262014-06-102015-01-26http://hdl.handle.net/10315/28191The primary aim of this Dissertation was to investigate the effect of power on victims’ decision to seek revenge against, or hold a grudge against, or forgive the transgressor following a transgression. The secondary aim of this Dissertation was to examine one potential boundary condition as well as potential mechanisms that underlie these effects. Guided by the approach/inhibition theory of power (Keltner et al., 2003), it was hypothesized that power would have a differential effect on post-transgression responses. As predicted, Study 1 showed that power had a positive effect on revenge and a negative effect on grudge. Also as predicted, Study 2 showed that approach motivation was one mechanism underlying the power-revenge relation and inhibition motivation was one mechanism underlying the power-grudge relation. In both studies, power did not have an effect on forgiveness. In addition, Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated the moderating role of assurance of no future transgression on the relation between power and post-transgression responses. Under conditions of assurance, powerful and powerless victims were less likely to seek revenge and hold a grudge, respectively, and were more likely to forgive. Finally and contrary to the prediction, results from Study 4 showed that there was no evidence for the mediational role of victims’ ‘lack of a need to teach the transgressor a lesson’ and ‘safety’ on the moderation between power and assurance on post-transgression responses. Possible explanations of these results and limitations of this research are discussed.enAuthor owns copyright, except where explicitly noted. Please contact the author directly with licensing requests.Social psychologyPsychologyOrganizational behaviorElectronic Thesis or Dissertation2015-01-26ForgivenessPowerAssuranceRevengeGrudge