Adam Grant is a widely-known psychologist and bestselling author. His work often studies how people find motivation and meaning in their work and lives. In this article, originally published in The Washington Post, Grant considers the age old idea that power corrupts people.

Question

As you read, take notes on how the author uses evidence to support his argument.

Another day, another leader seems to fall from a seat of power. The #MeToo movement has shown us devastating evidence of how male superiors have abused their power over female subordinates. The Catholic Church has offered demoralizing revelations of how priests have abused their power over nuns and children.

When leaders cross the line, we often blame power. As Lord Acton famously expressed it, “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

But it’s not entirely true.

Last year at the World Economic Forum in Davos, I wanted to understand the impact of power on people. I sat down with two dozen leaders, including the current or former CEOs of Microsoft, Google, General Motors, Goldman Sachs and the Gates Foundation. Over and over again, I heard that power doesn’t change people as much as it accentuates their preexisting traits.

As Slack founder and CEO Stewart Butterfield quipped, “It doesn’t make you an [expletive]. It just makes you more of who you already were.”

That’s actually a good summary of the new line of thinking in psychology: Power is like an amplifier. Whoever we were before just gets louder.

In one experiment, psychologists set up an annoying fan so that it would blow in people’s faces. The participants’ odds of moving it away, turning it off, or unplugging it spiked from 42 percent to 69 percent if they had just written about a time when they had power.

In other experiments, when people were reminded of feeling powerful, they were more likely to express their own opinions and ideas instead of conforming to others. And when they were assigned the role of manager rather than subordinate before a negotiation, they were more likely to bargain their own way instead of adapting to an opponent’s style.

Power disinhibits us. It releases us from the shackles of social pressure. Gaining influence and authority frees us up to act on our real wishes and show our true colors. Few would argue that we need look any further than the current White House occupant to see the ultimate example of how power can magnify a person’s personality.The experiments illustrated a direct link between power and…

safety.

health.

institutions.

individualism.

Answer 1

In the article, Adam Grant challenges the conventional belief that power inherently corrupts individuals by presenting evidence from his discussions with prominent leaders and psychological experiments. Here’s a breakdown of how he uses various forms of evidence to support his argument:

1. Anecdotal Evidence from Leaders: Grant shares insights gained from interviews with influential figures at the World Economic Forum, including CEOs from major corporations. He emphasizes that these leaders consistently expressed the idea that power amplifies rather than transforms an individual's existing traits. This collective observation suggests a broader psychological trend rather than isolated incidents.

2. Quotations: The article includes a quote from Stewart Butterfield, the founder of Slack, reinforcing the idea that power reveals one’s true nature rather than creating it. This quote supports Grant's argument by providing a succinct summary of the findings from the leaders he interviewed.

3. Psychological Experiments: Grant references specific experiments conducted by psychologists that demonstrate how power influences behavior:

   • In one experiment, participants who reflected on times they had power showed a significant increase in their willingness to exert control over an annoying fan. This finding reveals that power can lead to more assertive behavior.
   • Other experiments showed that empowered individuals were more likely to express personal opinions rather than conform to group pressure. This supports the notion that power can liberate individuals from societal constraints, allowing their true preferences to emerge.
   • The negotiation experiment illustrates how the role of power influences bargaining styles, indicating that power can affect decision-making dynamics.

4. Generalization of Findings: Grant asserts that power acts as an amplifier, emphasizing individual traits, which invites to consider the implications of this amplification on society, particularly in leadership contexts. He subtly critiques the narrative of power corruption by navigating through examples rooted in psychological evidence.

5. Contemporary Example: Grant concludes with a reference to the current political landscape, suggesting that prominent leaders, such as the U.S. president, exemplify how power can magnify personal characteristics. This real-world connection lends urgency and relevance to his argument.

Overall, Grant employs a combination of anecdotal evidence, authoritative quotes, empirical research, and contemporary examples to effectively argue that power amplifies preexisting traits rather than corrupting inherently good individuals.

Answer 2

Sorry this was the question and the rest is the article sorry i just put it at the end The experiments illustrated a direct link between power and…

safety.

health.

institutions.

individualism.