Government is a political institution with formal methods of acquiring and exercising power and authority. This political institution encompasses all the means and processes by which a society maintains order. Consequently, power is necessary for authority, but it is possible to have power without authority. In other words, power is necessary but not sufficient for authority. Despite the differences between government systems in the Middle East and the United States, their governments play the same fundamental role: in some fashion, they exert control over the people they govern.
The nature of that control—what we will define as power and authority—is an important feature of society. Sociologists have a distinctive approach to studying governmental power and authority that differs from the perspective of political scientists.
For the most part, political scientists focus on studying how power is distributed in different types of political systems. Sociologists, however, tend to be more interested in the influences of governmental power on society and in how social conflicts arise from the distribution of power.
Sociologists also examine how the use of power affects local, state, national, and global agendas, which in turn affect people differently based on status, class, and socioeconomic standing. Figure 1. Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was one of the most powerful and destructive dictators in modern history.
He is pictured here with fascist Benito Mussolini of Italy. Photo courtesy of U. National Archives and Records Administration. For centuries, philosophers, politicians, and social scientists have explored and commented on the nature of power. Pittacus c. Indeed, the concept of power can have decidedly negative connotations, and the term itself is difficult to define. Power affects more than personal relationships; it shapes larger dynamics like social groups, professional organizations, and governments.
A dominant nation, for instance, will often use its clout to influence or support other governments or to seize control of other nation states.
Efforts by the U. Figure 2. Young people and students were among the most ardent supporters of democratic reform in the recent Arab Spring. Social media also played an important role in rallying grassroots support. Endeavors to gain power and influence do not necessarily lead to violence, exploitation, or abuse. Leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. Both men organized nonviolent protests to combat corruption and injustice and succeeded in inspiring far-reaching reforms.
They relied on a variety of nonviolent protest strategies such as rallies, sit-ins, marches, petitions, and boycotts. Modern technology has made such forms of nonviolent reform easier to implement. Today, protesters can use cell phones and the Internet to disseminate information and plans to masses of protesters in a rapid and efficient manner. In the Arab Spring uprisings, for example, Twitter feeds and other social media helped protesters coordinate their movements, share ideas, and bolster morale, as well as gain global support for their causes.
Social media was also important in getting accurate accounts of the demonstrations out to the world, in contrast to many earlier situations in which government control of the media censored news reports. Two unexpected results were found. First, in Study 2, and by tendency in Studies 3 and 4, legitimate power, contrary to expectations, increased the enforced motive to cooperate. This is in line with Ouchi's informal clan control, which sees reciprocity and a legitimate organization as the foundation.
Additionally, social agreement, such as common values and beliefs, would constitute a further pre-requisite for clan control. Another possible reason is that legitimate power leads to the impression that authorities have a high proficiency for detecting and punishing defecting individuals, which results in feelings of enforced compliance. This result shows that a relations between legitimate power and enforced compliance needs to be included in the Slippery Slope Framework Gangl et al.
Second, contrary to expectations but in line with earlier findings Hofmann et al. When combined, the exertion of audits and fines i. This assumption was supported by Study 2, which showed that coercive power is more pronounced when legitimate power is rather high in this study, only legitimate power was manipulated and no information on coercive power was given. Then, trust in authorities and relational climates were more effected by legitimate power than by coercive power alone.
This is suggested by the relatively strong impact of legitimate power on reason-based trust in Study 2—4. Overall, the present results certainly indicate a connection between coercive power and legitimate power. With the current experiments, this connection, e. The current studies have some limitations that have to be addressed in future research.
The research theoretically bases on the slippery slope framework postulating that authorities' different forms of power influence cognitions and subsequently cooperative behavior. It can be argued that this causal relationship could be the other way round that not power impacts cognitions but actual cognitions are responsible for the perceptions of power. This certainly can be the case and needs further empirical evidence, nevertheless, as our studies show, there certainly is a significant impact of power on cognitions.
This, nonetheless, is actually an advantage. That said, laboratory experiments still create a highly artificial situation in which individuals might not behave as in an everyday context. Therefore, allowing participants to take part in an online experiment at home Study 4 is a possibility to counteract this artificiality without changing manipulation.
Nevertheless, future field experiments that not only investigate the direct impact of power on cooperation e. Furthermore, the experimental design of the current study can only test for differences. The correlative connections between power and processes are only assumed. Thus, this design only allows for limited conclusions regarding the mediators since they are based on manipulated factors of fictitious authorities and not on actual existing authorities. However, due to the experimental setting, we were able to obtain high internal validity.
Future research needs to increase external validity and address the studied relationships by using field data. Literature indicates that the severity of punishment is contingent on the type of social dilemma situation Molenmaker et al. It has to be mentioned that legal circumstances of tax authorities and insurance organizations are different.
While in comparison to tax authorities, insurance organizations do not have the legal right to punish insurance fraud. Taxpayers, compared to insurance holders, also do not have the option to turn to another tax authority if they are not satisfied with a specific tax authority's conduct. Taxpayers are at the mercy of one specific tax authority in a certain country. Nevertheless, results on the impact of power work similarly in both contexts. The two authorities in the studies, the tax authority and the insurance organization, represent a small range of authorities that wield power to control individuals' behavior in different situations.
In future research, other institutions, such as governments ensuring citizens' environmental friendliness, should be investigated. Research on how their power affects trust, relational climates, and motives for cooperation will further support, as well as extend, current findings.
From a practical point of view, the present findings are of value, not only for tax authorities and insurance companies, but for all authorities wielding power. Results show that sanctions of undesired behavior, as well as legitimate procedures, both not only foster cooperation, but also have different impacts on underlying cognitions. Severe punishments lead to a hostile and antagonistic climate that should be avoided, whereas supportive procedures foster trust toward the authority and the perception of a reciprocative service climate.
Legitimate power operates via establishing reason-based trust. Tax authorities and insurance organizations are supposed to reduce costly punishments, provide supportive procedures and helpful information, and pursue societal goals to assure a service climate.
This would, in the long run, create trust toward them which fosters cooperative behavior. The findings also indicate that strict audits and severe fines might alienate individuals that are either reacting with enforced compliance or looking for more appealing alternatives. Thus, the current results should initiate rethinking power of all authorities shaping individual behavior. While the mediating effects clearly show that a key factor in understanding the mechanisms is reason-based trust, implicit trust, the relational climates and motives to comply become of marginal interest.
They are mainly a product of specific forms of power, but they do not interfere with the actual connection of power and behavioral intention. These findings have extensive consequences for theory, as well as for real world authorities, giving direction for future research and specifying actions for power wielding authorities.
In a nutshell, trust building measures are central, as reason-based trust is mediating the impact of power on cooperation, but other cognitions interaction climates, motives might not have that importance for cooperation.
The present study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki 7th revision, and local ethical guidelines for experimentation with human participants at the Faculty of Psychology of the University of Vienna.
All participants gave written informed consent prior to the experiment. EH: Research design, conduction of Studies 1—4, analyses of Studies 1—4, drafting of article. BH: Conduction of Study 4, analyses of Studies 1—4, drafting of article. KG: Research design, analyses of Studies 1—4, drafting of article. MH: Conduction of Studies 1—4, drafting of article. EK: Drafting of article. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
While enforced compliance is comparable to extrinsic motivation based on external regulation, voluntary cooperation can neither be classified as other forms of extrinsic based on introjection, identification, integration or intrinsic information, because it is actually a reciprocal act.
Alm, J. Culture differences and tax morale in the United States and in Europe. Andreoni, J. Tax compliance. Google Scholar. Andrighetto, G. Are some countries more honest than others? Evidence from a tax compliance experiment in Sweden and Italy. Andringa, T. Learning autonomy in two or three steps: linking open-ended development, authority, and agency to motivation.
Ariel, B. Deterrence and moral persuasion effects on corporate tax compliance: findings from a randomized controlled trial.
Criminology 50, 27— Bachmann, R. Trust, power and control in trans-organizational relations. Balliet, D. Trust, punishment, and cooperation across 18 societies: a meta-analysis. Becker, G. Crime and punishment: an economic approach. Bijlsma-Frankema, K. Understanding the trust—control nexus. Braithwaite, V. Cheltenham: E dward Elgar Publishing. Castelfranchi, C. West Sussex: W iley. Chenhall, R. Social capital and management control system: a study of a non-government organization.
Copeland, P. Multiple determinants of framing referents in tax reporting and compliance. Das, T. Trust, control, and risk in strategic alliances: an integrated framework. Ehrhart, M. New York, NY: Routledge. Fehr, E. Psychological foundations of incentives. Feld, L. Tax compliance as the result of a psychological tax contract: the role of incentives and responsive regulation.
Law Policy 29, — Fischbacher, U. Freiberg, A. The Tools of Regulation. French, J. Fu, S. Gangl, K. Tax authorities' interaction with taxpayers: a conception of compliance in social dilemmas by power and trust. New Ideas Psychol. FinanzArchiv 69, — Effects of supervision on tax compliance: evidence from a field experiment in Austria. Hartl, B.
Does the sole description of a tax authority affect tax evasion? Hartner-Tiefenthaler, M. Hayes, A. Bucy and R. Hinkin, T. Development and application of new scales to measure the French and Raven bases of social power. Hofmann, E. Enhancing tax compliance through coercive and legitimate power of tax authorities by concurrently diminishing or facilitating trust in tax authorities.
Law Policy 36, — Kelman, C. Interests, relationships, identities: three central issues for individuals and groups in negotiating their social environment.
Kirchler, E. Effort and aspirations in tax evasion: experimental evidence. Kramer, R. Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Kroll, S. Voting, punishment, and public goods. Malhotra, D. The effects of contracts on interpersonal trust.
Martin, K. Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: a meta-analytic review. Ethics 69, — Second, it must have binding authority over citizens and actions in its jurisdiction. Lastly, it must possess the right to legitimately use the physical force in its jurisdiction.
President Barack Obama : Barack Obama, President of the United States, derives his authority from a rational-legal system of laws outlined in a formal document, the Constitution of the United States of America.
Max Weber on Rational-Legal Authority : According to Weber, rational-legal authority is a form of leadership in which the authority of an organization or a ruling regime is largely tied to legal rationality, legal legitimacy, and bureaucracy.
Create a model of a hypothetical charismatic leader in a hypothetical government which describes the charisma and explains in detail how it is legitimized, used, and maintained. In contrast to the current popular use of the term charismatic leader, Weber saw charismatic authority not so much as character traits of the charismatic leader but as a relationship between the leader and his followers. Charismatic authority almost always evolves in the context of boundaries set by traditional or rational-legal authority, but by its nature tends to challenge this authority, and is thus often seen as revolutionary.
However, the constant challenge that charismatic authority presents to a particular society will eventually subside as it is incorporated into that society through routinization. In politics, charismatic rule is often found in various authoritarian states, autocracies, dictatorships, and theocracies. In order to help to maintain their charismatic authority, such regimes will often establish a vast cult of personality, which is signaled when an individual uses mass media, propaganda, or other methods to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.
When the leader of such a state dies or leaves office and a new charismatic leader does not appear, such a regime is likely to fall shortly thereafter unless it has become fully routinized.
According to Max Weber, the methods of charismatic succession are search, revelation, designation by original leader, designation by qualified staff, hereditary charisma, and office charisma. These are the various ways in which an individual and a society can contrive to maintain the unique energy and nature of charisma in their leadership.
Mussolini and Hitler : According to Weber, charismatic leaders gain authority not because they are necessarily kind, but because they are seen as superhuman. A presidential transition refers to the period of time between the end of a presidential election and the inauguration of a new president.
During this time, the incoming president usually designates new governmental personnel, including those individuals who will either serve in the cabinet or lead governmental agencies. In the United States, the presidential transition extends from the date of the presidential election, in early November, until the twentieth day of January in the following year. This was specified in the Twentieth Amendment to the Constitution.
That being said, the incoming president-elect is not yet legally empowered to enforce policy. This ambiguity, between the president-elect and outgoing president, creates the potential for a leadership vacuum, which may be most acutely felt during wartime or times of economic crisis.
These efforts can be both judicial and non-judicial, and refer to actions, policies or institutions that are enacted at a point of political transition from violence or repression to societal stability.
As a project, transitional justice has a number of goals, including rebuilding social trust, repairing a fractured judicial system, and building a democratic system of governance.
In the context of transitional justice, memorialization is used to honor the victims of human rights abuses. By demonstrating respect and acknowledging the past, national memorials can help governments reconcile tensions with victims. They can also help to establish a record of history and to prevent the recurrence of abuse. Presidential Inauguration, : In the United States, elaborate inauguration ceremonies mark the transfer of authority.
Privacy Policy. Skip to main content. Search for:. Politics, Power, and Authority. Politics Political sociology studies the relation between state and society, authority and power, and the methods used to formulate social policy. Learning Objectives Diagram the three major traditional theoretical frameworks of political sociology, plus trends in contemporary sociology. It consists of social relations involving authority or power, the regulation of political units, and the methods used to formulate and apply social policy.
Traditionally there have been four main areas of research: the socio-political formation of the modern state; how social inequality influences politics; how social movements outside of the formal institutions affect formal politics; and power relationships within and between social groups. There are three major theoretical frameworks: pluralism, elite or managerial theory, and class analysis. Pluralism sees politics primarily as a contest among competing interest groups.
Social class theory analysis emphasizes the political power of capitalist elites. Key Terms social policy : Guidelines, principles, legislation and activities that affect the living conditions conducive to human welfare.
A government. Power Power is frequently defined as the ability to influence the behavior of others with or without resistance. Learning Objectives Differentiate between power and constraint, using real life examples. Key Takeaways Key Points Power can be seen as evil or unjust, but the exercise of power is accepted as endemic to humans as social beings.
The sociological examination of power concerns itself with discovering and describing the relative strengths: equal or unequal; stable or subject to periodic change. Power may derive from a number of sources, including social class material wealth can equal power , resource currency material items such as money, property, food , personal or group charisma, or social influence of tradition compare ascribed power.
Researchers have documented the bystander effect: they found that powerful people are three times as likely to first offer help to a stranger in distress. Key Terms unilateralism : A tendency of nations to act on their own, or with only minimal consultation and involvement with other nations. Learning Objectives Give examples of the three types of authority as defined by Max Weber and what distinguishes all of them from coercion or force. Key Takeaways Key Points Power can be exerted by the use of force or violence.
Weber states that legitimacy distinguishes authority, from coercion, force, power, leadership, persuasion and influence. Authoritarianism primarily differs from totalitarianism in that social and economic institutions exist that are not under governmental control. The three attributes of authority are status, specialist skills, and social position.
Authority and Legitimate Violence Max Weber conceived of the state as a monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force. Key Takeaways Key Points Weber defines the state as a community successfully claiming authority over legitimate use of physical force in a given territory. Besides the police and the military, private force can be used too, as long as it has legitimacy derived from the state.
Key Terms right of self-defense : The right of self-defense according to U. Max Weber : — A German sociologist, philosopher, and political economist who profoundly influenced social theory, social research, and the discipline of sociology itself.
Traditional Authority Traditional authority refers to a form of leadership in which authority derives from tradition or custom. Learning Objectives Compare patrimonial government with feudalism within the context of traditional authority. Key Takeaways Key Points Weber traced traditional domination back to patriarchs, their households, and the ancient tradition of family. In such systems, the master is designated in accordance with the rules of inheritance. All officials are personal dependents or favorites of the ruler, and are appointed by him.
Feudalism replaced the paternal relationship of patrimonalism with a contract of allegiance based on knightly militarism.
0コメント