thesis on abuse of power

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Commun Integr Biol
• v.16(1); 2023
• PMC10461512

On power and its corrupting effects: the effects of power on human behavior and the limits of accountability systems

Tobore onojighofia tobore.

Independent Scholar, Yardley, PA, USA

Power is an all-pervasive, and fundamental force in human relationships and plays a valuable role in social, political, and economic interactions. Power differences are important in social groups in enhancing group functioning. Most people want to have power and there are many benefits to having power. However, power is a corrupting force and this has been a topic of interest for centuries to scholars from Plato to Lord Acton. Even with increased knowledge of power’s corrupting effect and safeguards put in place to counteract such tendencies, power abuse remains rampant in society suggesting that the full extent of this effect is not well understood. In this paper, an effort is made to improve understanding of power’s corrupting effects on human behavior through an integrated and comprehensive synthesis of the neurological, sociological, physiological, and psychological literature on power. The structural limits of justice systems’ capability to hold powerful people accountable are also discussed.

1. Introduction

Scholars across different disciplines have tried to define power [ 1 ]. It has been defined as having the potential to influence others or having asymmetric dominion over valuable resources in a social relationship [ 2 , 3 ]. It has also been defined as the capacity of people to summon means and resources to achieve ends [ 1 ]. In addition, it has been described as having the disposition and means to asymmetrically impose one’s will over others and entities [ 4 ]. Taken together, power can be defined as being able to influence others due to asymmetric dominion of resources, the capability to summon means to achieve ends, and being able to impose one’s will over others and entities. Power is an all-pervasive and fundamental force in human relationships and plays a valuable role in social, political, and economic interactions [ 4 ]. It plays an important role in many aspects of human life, from the workplace, and romantic relationships, to the family [ 5 , 6 ]. Power is dynamic, and it resides in the social context, and should the social context change, power relations tend to change as well [ 1 ]. There are different types of power and their effective utility lies within a limited range [ 7 ].

Power differences within groups enhance group functioning by promoting cooperation [ 8 ], creating and maintaining order, and facilitating coordination [ 9 ]. Most people want to have power and there are many benefits to having power. People desire power to be masters of their own lives and to have greater autonomy over their fate [ 10 , 11 ]. Position in the dominance hierarchy is correlated with both general and mental health [ 12 ] and associated with reproductive access, grooming from others as well as preferential food and spaces [ 13 ]. Elevated power promotes authentic self-expression [ 14 ], reduced anger, greater happiness, and positive emotions/mood [ 5 ]. In contrast, low power is associated with negative emotions (discomfort and fear) [ 15–17 ], increased stress, and alcohol abuse [ 18 ].

Evolutionarily, dominance and perceptions of power cues are associated with body size. Indeed, social status can be attained through two pathways: prestige or dominance [ 13 ]. Height is positively related to dominant status [ 19 ]. High-status prestigious and dominant individuals tend to be judged as taller, and taller individuals as higher in prestige and dominance [ 20 ]. Also, dominant high-status people tend to be judged as more well-built, and more well built individuals as dominant [ 20 ]. Power and status (i.e., respect and admiration) represent different dimensions of social hierarchy but are positively correlated [ 21 ]. Power is causally connected to status because power can lead to the possession of status and status can result in the acquisition of power [ 21 ]. Power from social status is a central and omnipresent feature of human life and they are both correlated in terms of control of institutions, political influence, material resources, and access to essential commodities [ 22 , 23 ]. From an evolutionary perspective, high status is sought because reproductively relevant resources, including territory, food, mating opportunities, etc. tend to flow to those high in status compared to those low in status [ 24 ].

Having power affects the human body physiologically, neurologically, and psychologically. Power is linked with neurological alterations in the brain. Indeed, power triggers the behavioral approach system [ 2 , 25 ] while powerlessness undermines executive functioning [ 17 ]. Low social power state compared to high or neutral power is associated with significantly reduced left-frontal cortical activity [ 26 ]. Animals research suggests that dominance status modulates activities in dopaminergic neural pathways linked with motivation [ 27 , 28 ] and the amygdala and dopaminergic neurons play a major in responding to social rank (an individual’s social place as either subordinate or dominant in a group), and hierarchy signals [ 29 ]. Brain recordings indicate that loss of social status induces negative reward prediction error which via the lateral hypothalamus triggers the lateral habenula (anti-reward center), inhibiting the medial prefrontal cortex [ 30 ]. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), observing a powerful individual differentially engaged the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, regions related to the amygdala (emotional processing), medial prefrontal cortex (social cognition) indicating a neural processing of social ranking and status in humans [ 31 , 32 ]. Furthermore, using fMRI, perceived social status was found to differentially modulate ventral striatal responses when processing social rank cues or status-related information [ 33 ]. Results from fMRI indicate that low social status is associated with diminished gray matter size in the perigenual area of the anterior cingulate cortex, which is associated with adaptive physiological, emotional, and behavioral reactions to psychosocial and environmental stressors [ 34 ]. Approach related motivation is linked to increased left-sided frontal activity in the brain, and the neural evidence of the relationship between approach related motivation and power was confirmed using EEG, which found that elevated power is connected with increased left-frontal activity in the brain compared to low power [ 35 ].

Also, power is linked with endocrinal and physiological changes. Testosterone increases dominance and other status-seeking behaviors [ 36 , 37 ] and this effect of testosterone on dominant behavior may be modulated by psychological stress and cortisol [ 38 ]. High testosterone has been identified as a factor that promotes the development of the socially destructive component of narcissism in powerholders [ 39 ], and power interacts with testosterone in predicting corruption [ 40 ]. Posing in high-power nonverbal displays causes physiological changes including increased feelings of power, a decrease in cortisol, increases in testosterone, and increased tolerance for risk compared to low-power posers [ 41 ]. Animal studies indicate that low social rank or subordination promotes stress activating the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) and may modulate the brain’s dopaminergic function [ 42 ]. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that tryptophan enhances dominant behavior indicating that serotonin may promote dominance in humans [ 43 , 44 ]. Furthermore, results from experiments suggest that high social power elicits a benign cardiovascular response suggestive of a well-ordered cardiovascular pattern while low social power elicits a maladaptive cardiovascular response pattern which is suggestive of an inefficient cardiovascular pattern [ 45 ]. Power holders who may lose their privileged position displayed a maladaptive cardiovascular pattern, marked by low cardiac output (CO) and high total peripheral resistance which is suggestive of feeling threatened [ 46 ]. Evidence suggests that higher social status is associated with approach-type physiology compared to lower social status [ 47 ].

Power has a monumental effect on the behavior of the powerholder [ 2 , 48 ]. The corrupting effect of power is well known and has been a topic of interest for centuries to scholars. Plato advocated for the exclusion from office with consequential power, individuals who may misuse power for self-serving reasons, and only those with a well-developed sense of justice be allowed to wield power [ 49 ]. In recent decades, the corruption cases involving CEOs of large corporations, entrepreneurs, politicians, and autocrats/dictators have sparked both scholars’ and public interest in the corrupting effects of power [ 50–55 ] and this has triggered significant research into the effects of power on human behavior. Still, the full extent of power’s effect on behavior is not well understood. The monumental role that power plays in human interactions and life makes the need to better understand its effect on behavior both in powerholders and subordinates extremely important.

The objective of this paper is to elucidate the many corrupting effects of power or the need for power on human behavior as well as the structural limits of systems to hold powerholders accountable.

2. The corrupting effects of power or the need for power on human behavior

2.1. power is addictive.

There is evidence of addiction to the power derived from celebrity and fame [ 56 ]. The addictive effect on the powerholder promotes the need to engage in efforts to hold on to and accumulate power [ 57–59 ]. Aging, envy, and fear both conscious and unconscious of retaliation for previous acts may contribute to power’s addictiveness [ 58 ]. Efforts to hold on to power perpetually play a key in the practice of nepotism, factional struggle by powerful elites, cronyism, and dynastic succession [ 60–62 ].

Power abuse disorder has been coined as a neuropsychiatry condition connected to the addictive behavior of the power wielder [ 63 ]. Arguments have been made on the relationship between power addiction and dopaminergic alterations [ 63 ]. Indeed, changes in the dopaminergic system have been implicated in drug addiction [ 64 ] and research on animals suggests that dominance status modulates activity in dopaminergic neural pathways linked with motivation [ 27 , 28 ]. Evidence suggests that areas of the brain linked with addiction including the amygdala and dopaminergic neurons play a major in responding to social rank, and hierarchy signals [ 29 ]. Multiple lines of evidence from animal studies indicate that dopamine D2/D3 receptor density and availability is higher in the basal ganglia, including the nucleus accumbens, of animals with great social dominance compared to their subordinates [ 28 , 65 , 66 ]. Animal studies suggest that following forced loss of social rank, there is a craving for the privileges of status, leading to depressive-like symptoms which are reversed when social status is reinstated [ 30 , 67 ].

2.2. Power promotes self-righteousness, moral exceptionalism, and hypocrisy

Research indicates that powerful people are more likely to moralize, judge, and enforce strict moral standards on others while engaging in hypocritical or less strict moral behavior themselves [ 68 ]. In other words, powerful people often act and speak like they are sitting on the right hand of God to others especially subordinates while engaging in even worse unethical behavior. Being in a position of power with the discretion to apply punishment or reward to others allows the powerholder the freedom to do as they like or act inconsistently in so far as it serves their interests. This means powerholders are in a position to not necessarily practice what they preach with little or no consequences. Furthermore, being in a position to judge or take punitive action against others for their perceived moral failings may promote a false sense of moral superiority. This self-righteousness can create a misguided sense of probity and messianic zeal which can lead to poor decisions and outcomes. One takeaway from the relationship between power, self-righteousness, and hypocrisy is that power inhibits self-reflection or introspection.

This moral exceptionalism and hypocrisy also exist at the national and international levels. Powerful Western nations typically moralize and lecture about the rule of law, ethics, and democracy to other nations while hypocritically violating the same rules when it suits them or supporting allies that flagrantly violate the same rules [ 69–72 ].

Furthermore, mob action whether virtual or not is usually triggered by perceived injustice, a violation of societal norms, and unfair practices in the criminal justice system that undermine public institutional trust and confidence [ 73–76 ]. Placing wrongdoing on someone puts them (the wrongdoer) in a weaker power position socially which makes them vulnerable. With the power dynamics or balance tilted in the mob’s favor, the perceived injustice or wrongdoing envelopes the mob in an umbrella of sanctimony empowering them to act with impunity, and vigilantism by engaging in moral denunciations, bullying, destruction of property, and even lynching and other forms of violence toward the wrongdoer [ 77–79 ].

2.3. Power decreases empathy and compassion

Power decreases empathic concern [ 80 ] and is associated with reduced interpersonal sensitivity [ 81 ]. Research indicates that powerholders may experience less distress and less compassion as well as exhibit greater autonomic emotion regulation when faced with the pain of others [ 82 ]. Evidence indicates that elevated power impedes accurate understanding of other people’s emotional expressions [ 9 , 83 ] and is linked with poorer accuracy in emotional prosody identification than low power [ 84 ]. Elevated power is associated with heightened interest in rewards while low power is associated with increased attention to the interest of others [ 2 , 48 , 85 ].

Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, motor resonance which is the activation of similar brain pathways when acting and when observing someone act, implemented partly by the human mirror system was decreased in high-power holders relative to low-power holders [ 81 ]. Evidence suggests a linear relationship between the motor resonance system and power in which increasing accumulation of power is connected to decreasing levels of resonance [ 81 ]. This change might be one of the neural mechanisms that underlie power-induced asymmetries in social interactions [ 81 ].

Also, higher socioeconomic status is associated with reduced neural responses to the pain of others [ 86 , 87 ]. In contrast, a lower socioeconomic level is associated with higher compassion, being more attuned to the distress of others [ 88 , 89 ] and more empathically correct in evaluating the emotions of other people [ 90 ] compared to upper-socioeconomic class. High status is associated with exhibiting less communal and prosocial behavior and decreased likelihood of endorsing more egalitarian life goals and values compared with those with low status [ 91 ]. In addition, higher-class people are more likely to endorse the theory that social class is steeped in genetically based (heritable) innate differences than lower-class people and display reduced support for restorative justice [ 92 ].

2.4. Power promotes disinhibited behavior and overconfidence

Elevated power is associated with disinhibited behavior, increased freedom, and heightened interest in rewards while low power is associated with inhibited social behavior [ 2 , 48 , 85 ]. Power is associated with optimism and riskier behavior [ 93 ] and it enhances self-regulation and performance [ 94 ]. It energizes, speech, thought, and action and magnifies confidence, and enhances self-expression [ 14 , 25 ]. Power elevates self-esteem and impacts how people evaluate and view themselves in comparison to others [ 25 , 95 ]. Elevated power particularly in narcissistic individuals results in significant overconfidence compared to individuals in a low state of power [ 96 ].

Power increases the illusion of control over outcomes that are outside the reach of the powerholder [ 97 ]. It distorts impressions of physical size with the powerful exaggerating their height and feeling taller than they actually are [ 98 ], underestimating the size of others, and the powerless overestimating the size of others [ 99 ].

2.5. Power promotes unethical behavior and entitlement

Power promotes feelings of entitlement [ 100 ] and powerholders are not often cognizant of their violation of basic fairness principles [ 25 ]. Evidence from experiments using fMRI indicates that power promotes greed by increasing aversion to receiving less than others and reducing aversion to receiving more than others [ 101 ]. Powerholders, particularly pro-self-individuals, displayed decreased response in the right and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, indicating a weaker restrain of self-interest when processing receiving more than others [ 101 ]. The need for power is significantly and positively correlated with narcissism [ 102 , 103 ]. Power amplifies the tendency of self-focused goals to result in self-interested behavior [ 104 ] and may cause people to act unethically in their self-interest [ 50–52 , 105 ]. Powerful people tend to move in the same circles, giving them access, and increased likelihood of having relationships with other powerful people and these relationships may foster unethical behaviors including quid pro quo, nepotism/favoritism, cronyism, mutual protection against threats, ignoring or bypassing of due process, conflict of interests and corruption.

Physical attractiveness influences people’s social evaluations of others and attractive people enjoy benefits in terms of perceived good health, power, economic advantage, confidence, trust, perceived intelligence, and popularity [ 106–112 ]. Research suggests that the power of perceived attractiveness is associated with increased self-interested behavior and psychological entitlement [ 113 ]. Furthermore, power gained from improved physical appearance/attractiveness, increased attention, improved self-image, and self-confidence following bariatric surgery weight loss is linked to increased separation/divorce [ 114–116 ]. This suggests that power from improved physical appearance and attention following bariatric surgery may promote entitlement, narcissism, and self-interested behavior.

Power makes powerholders feel special, invincible, and above the rules. Indeed, car cost predicts driver yielding to pedestrians with more expensive car drivers less likely to yield to pedestrians at a crosswalk [ 117 ]. While driving, individuals of higher-class are more likely to break the law compared to lower-class individuals and are more likely to cheat and lie and display unethical decision-making tendencies than lower-class individuals [ 118 ].

2.6. Power promotes aggressive and dehumanizing behavior

Power promotes dehumanization, which is the process of rejecting essential components of “humanness” in others and seeing them as animals or objects [ 119 , 120 ] while powerlessness leads to self-dehumanization [ 121 ]. Power promotes the objectification of others [ 122 ] and increases the tendency to disparage and engage in harmful behavior toward others including bullying, autocracy, and manipulation [ 123–125 ].

Also, elevated power is associated with manipulative and contemptuous behavior toward people with low power by devaluing their worth [ 126 ]. It is associated with demeaning, and dehumanizing behavior toward others with low power, with more power resulting in more demeaning behavior [ 127 , 128 ]. Notably, individuals in high power but lacking in status (e.g., prison guards, soldiers) display increased interpersonal conflict and demeaning behaviors [ 127 , 129 ]. Furthermore, research indicates that a powerholder’s threat assessment elicits escalation or confrontational behaviors toward subordinates and de-escalation or submissive behaviors toward higher-status or dominant superiors [ 130 ]. In defense of their ego, power coupled with feelings of incompetence can promote aggressive behavior [ 131 ].

One key reason for the emergence of this demeaning and dehumanizing behavior of powerful people is their false sense of superiority over individuals with low power. This is reinforced by the excessive praise and groveling of subordinates and the fact they are they have the authority to impose negative consequences on others, and few are bold enough to challenge them out of fear of retaliation. This feeling or sense of superiority is particularly more pronounced in an environment where there is little to no oversight over their behavior, and it can gradually divorce them from reality. Jokes that were once considered mundane or innocuous before they acquired power or accumulated more power are suddenly perceived as insults. Anyone who dares to argue for a different position, especially one that suggests incompetence, is perceived as a threat that needs to be eliminated.

Moreover, experimental evidence indicates that asymmetric power differences can promote extortionary [ 132 ] and exploitative behaviors [ 133 ]. The power asymmetry between human traffickers and the young, vulnerable people they exploit explains the sense of entrapment of survivors, why the traffickers can engage in dehumanizing and demeaning behavior, violence, and forced labor with impunity, without any sense of guilt, remorse, or regard for the welfare of the trafficked individuals [ 134–136 ]. The power asymmetry between police officers and vulnerable people in their community (e.g., sex workers, the homeless, marginalized people, and minorities) explains to some extent the increased likelihood of police abuse toward members of those communities [ 137–139 ]. There are many stories of seemingly normal people enslaving and using violence against their maids [ 140 , 141 ]. Usually, people who become trapped in these situations are foreigners with no legal documentation or with legal papers connected to their work for that employer. The significant asymmetric power difference between the employer and the maid makes the maid vulnerable to abuse. Anyone in the position of employer can easily become abusive toward the vulnerable maid in an environment where negative consequences for their actions are nonexistent.

This same power asymmetry which may lead to bullying, intimidation, and exploitation can be observed between nation-states. Just like individuals, as disparities in economic and military power widen between countries, the larger and more powerful states may engage in bullying neighboring states through trade and other means including threats of war if they act outside of ways the more powerful nations prefer.

2.7. Power sexualizes social interactions

Power is linked with sex [ 142 ]. It elicits romantic desire from individuals of the opposite sex [ 143 ] and may play an important role in sexual objectification [ 144 , 145 ]. Evidence suggests that subordinates view their leaders as significantly more physically attractive [ 146 ] and power increases expectations of sexual interest from subordinates biasing social judgment and sexualizing social interactions which might lead to sexual harassment [ 147 ].

Power is positively associated with sexual infidelity because of its disinhibiting effects on behavior and increased self-confidence to attract partners [ 148 , 149 ]. Its disinhibiting effect also amplifies the appetite for both normative or counter-normative forms of sexuality and makes powerful men seem more desirable and attractive which may increase their access to potential sexual opportunities [ 148 ]. Power asymmetry between educators and students increases the potential for sexual misconduct and abuse [ 150–153 ].

Boundary setting, vigilance, and regular training for teachers and organizational supervisors on the sexualizing effect of power on social interactions should be put in place to reduce the incidence of sexual harassment and inappropriate relationships.

2.8. Power hinders perspective taking and cooperation

Low power is associated with increased cooperation [ 154 ] while elevated power may hinder perspective-taking [ 83 ] and increase the preference for the preservation of psychological distance from people with low power [ 126 , 155 ]. An fMRI study showed that powerholders display reduced neural activation in regions associated with cognitive control and perspective-taking (frontal eye field and precuneus) [ 101 ]. Results from electroencephalogram (EEG) suggest that power taints balanced cooperation by reducing the power holder’s motivation to cooperate with subordinates [ 156 ]. Also, power reduces conformity to the opinion of others [ 9 , 157 ] and is associated with discounting advice, due to overconfidence [ 158–160 ] as well as being less trusting [ 161 ] and this can hamper cooperation.

2.9. Power, judgment bias, and selective information processing

Power promotes the need for less diagnostic information about others and increases vulnerability to using preconscious processing and stereotypical information about others [ 162–165 ]. It increases implicit prejudice (racial bias) and implicit stereotyping [ 166 , 167 ]. Evidence suggests that elevated power is associated with automatic information processing, while low power is associated with restrictive information processing [ 2 , 48 , 85 ]. Power modulates basic cognition by promoting selective attention to information and suppressing peripheral information [ 168 ]. Results from an experiment found that neural activity in the left inferior frontal gyrus, an area linked with cognitive interference, was diminished for individuals with elevated power relative to those with low power suggesting that elevated power may reduce cognitive interference [ 169 ].

Elevated power promotes social attentional bias toward low-power holders [ 170 ]. It also promotes self-anchoring attitudes, traits, and emotions which is the use of the self as the gold standard or reference point for evaluating or judging others [ 171 ]. In other words, for powerful people good or bad traits and attitudes are viewed using themselves as a reference without regard for the individuality of others. Power modulates the process of making tough decisions [ 172 ] and it is associated with excessive confidence in judgment which may turn out to be less accurate [ 158–160 ].

2.10. Power confers credibility

Credibility carries power and power confers credibility relative to those with less power [ 173 , 174 ]. The claims or assertions of a person with power or high status are typically treated with respect. In contrast, the claims of individuals at the lower end of the power structure are often doubted until investigated, and that is if anyone even bothers to investigate thoroughly and fairly. Consider the Filipino maid working in Kuala Lumpur, the Ethiopian or Indian lady working as a maid somewhere in the Middle East, or the young girl from Calabar working as a maid for a rich family in Lagos. Typically, maids depend on their employers not just for housing and food, but for their immigration status as well. Who will believe her if she accuses her boss of sexual assault or if her boss falsely accuses her of stealing? Similarly, if a police officer, particularly one with an unblemished record, plants drugs on an ex-convict, who is going to believe the ex-convict? The more he protests, the guiltier he appears.

In the workplace, the significant power asymmetry between an employee and their supervisor gives their supervisor significant credibility. A report from a supervisor, whether true or false, carries considerable weight because of the credibility they automatically have relative to their employee.Disturbingly, the supervisor’s powers do not end within the four walls of the organization; employers at other organizations may depend on the assessment and opinion of the supervisor to pass judgment on a person without any regard for the possibility of their prejudice.

2.11. Power and victimhood

Not all victims are after power but being a victim can come with significant power [ 175–179 ]. Victims are seen as socially and morally superior and deserving of social deference [ 180 , 181 ]. Victimhood proffers psychological and social benefits and allows one to achieve greater social or political status [ 181 , 182 ]. This makes victimhood attractive.

The need for power significantly predicts competitive victimhood, which is a tendency to see one’s group as having dealt with more adversity relative to an outgroup [ 177–179 ]. Victims, especially those who appear weak or who are lower in the power structure, are seen as needing protection. In contrast, the accused are seen as aggressive and dangerous. The power derived from victimhood can be misused, and many people employ it for retribution. Being a victim or feeling wronged may result in a sense of entitlement and selfish behavior [ 182 ].

While it is important to protect victims in all cases, care must be taken to ensure that negative consequences are not applied reactionarily to the accused. Negative actions taken against the accused before a fair and thorough investigation is conducted make the exploitation of victimhood attractive. Even if the allegations are proven to be false, public outrage and adverse opinion can lead to irreparable reputational damage and financial loss. The noble pursuit of an equal and fair society must never blind us to the dangers posed by the exploitation of the power of victimhood to elicit outrage and pursue retribution.

2.12. Power and gossip

Gossip tends to be negative, and people engage in it for many reasons including for socializing, to gain influence and power, due to perceptions of unfairness, feelings of envy, jealousy, and resentment, to get moral information, creation and maintenance of in-groups and out-groups, indirect aggression, and social control [ 183–186 ]. Gossip has self-evaluative and emotional consequences [ 187 ].

Spreading gossip can be an effort to exercise power [ 188 ]. Lateral gossip or gossip between peers of similar power can help people get information and support from others. However, upward gossip which is gossip with people in higher power who have formal control over resources and the means to take action may be used by those in lower power to inform and thereby gain or exert influence [ 189 ]. Reputation and gossip are intertwined, and gossip can be used for status enhancement and wielded as a weapon against others [ 190 ].

The need for power may cause people to engage in gossiping and a person with a listening and believing audience of one has the power to destroy another person’s reputation and adversely affect their life.

2.13. Power and ambition

Ambition, defined as the persistent or relentless striving for success, attainment, and accomplishment or a yearning desire for success that is committedly pursued [ 191 ], is crucial to success in diverse social contexts. Ambition is positively associated with educational attainment, high income, occupation prestige, and greater satisfaction with life [ 192 , 193 ]. Power and ambition are inextricably linked because people with power and those who aspire for power are typically very ambitious. Ambition is critical in acquiring, accumulating, and retaining power.

Ambition, while critical to being successful [ 193 , 194 ] and an immensely powerful motivator, can also be a potent self-destructive tool and a vice that may cause people to inflict suffering on others in the pursuit of personal glory and gains [ 191 ]. Overreaching ambition breeds greed and can quickly slip into dishonesty [ 195 , 196 ]. Ambition and greed encourage both destructive competition and acquisitiveness as a way to affirm superiority over others [ 197 ]. Excessive ambition can be a curse as it can lead to extremism due to obsessive passion [ 198 ] and make people feel dissatisfied even with their accomplishments because their desires are insatiable or can never be fully achieved [ 191 , 199 ]. Ambition can make a person falsely believe that they are special, destined for greatness, or cut from a different cloth. While this feeling can be helpful in the pursuit of seemingly challenging goals, it can lead to unethical behavior [ 195 , 200 ].

In efforts to retain power and status, ambition can make people abuse power and for those trying to acquire power, it can make them go to extra lengths without regard for the negative consequences. Indeed, excessive ambition in powerful people or excessive ambition for power, fame, and prestige can blur the lines of acceptable behavior, and when those lines are crossed, it can result in actions that are fraudulent, illegal, and catastrophic [ 53 , 201–204 ]. Ambition can cause a person to act recklessly by exaggerating both reality and possibilities, as well as by downplaying important risks that may prove fatal. When people begin to see the end goal as the only thing that matters, they cut corners, and lose sight of ethics and the monumental danger their actions pose to others. In line with the dangers of ambition, Machiavelli argued that ambition and greed are the causes of chaos and war [ 197 ].

3. Power, and the structural limits of accountability systems

In most social systems, people who are lower in the power structure can only get misconduct addressed by a third party that has some power to punish, hold accountable, or overturn the judgment imposed by the powerholder. For example, an employee with allegations of wrongdoing by their manager, who is the CEO or President of the organization may not be able to hold them accountable within the organization. Their case may be best addressed by the court system, a third party with the authority to hold the organization accountable. Seeking fair redress or accountability within the organization can be difficult or even impossible because those in power are not motivated to change their behavior. So, unless the employee is willing to take their case to court (or another authority with a similar power to hold the employer accountable, like the press), there may not be a way for them to seek redress. Unfortunately, a third party is often not present, and even if one exists, it may not be impartial or easily accessed by people lower in the power structure.

Furthermore, there is a limit to the number of third parties or higher authorities in any social system for seeking redress. At some point, there must be a supreme authority whose ruling is final and irreversible. In a nation-state, the final authority may be the apex or Supreme Court. In sports, a ruling body makes final decisions. In the global arena, international courts have the final say against individuals or nations that violate relevant laws. Importantly, if the judgment of the top authority is incorrect or unjust, the only option is to accept the ruling until the issue is revisited. Also, the higher you must go in efforts to seek redress for wrongdoing, the less accessible it is for people who are lower in the power structure, and the fewer cases that are worthy of being taken on. These obstacles mean that many cases of power abuse go unchecked, unfair judgments are often passed, and miscarriages of justice occur at all levels. In addition, falsehoods about people and events sanctioned or protected by the powerful are carried as truth into posterity.

So, the means for holding accountable or checking the actions of the powerful by those with low power are limited not just by corruption and problems of access but by the structural limits of accountability/justice systems.

4. Discussion

The role of power in our lives is all-pervasive, and complex, and its effects extend to both intentional and unintentional acts of the powerholder [ 4 ]. The current review is different from previous works and contributes significantly to our understanding of power because of its extensiveness and broad synthesis of the literature on power from a wide range of disciplines including biology, neuroscience, psychology, behavioral sciences, sociology, and anthropology. One key lesson from this work is that the effects of power extend beyond the behavioral changes that are visible as power interacts with the neurological, neuroendocrine, psychological, and physiological processes of the power holder.

As noted in Figure 1 , power can dramatically change ordinary people’s behavior causing them to abuse it thereby making cumulative small mistakes that reach a dangerous threshold or a single significant mistake that ultimately leads to their loss of power. The narcissist personality model described in Figure 2 is different from the classical Model (Non-narcissist). The grandiose narcissist is assertive and extraverted and distinguished by their sense of entitlement, overconfidence, high self-esteem, feelings of personal superiority, self-serving exploitative behavior, impulsivity, a need for admiration and dominance, and aggressive and hostile behavior when threatened or challenged [ 205–208 ]. Grandiose narcissists are more likely to seek and achieve positions of power in organizations [ 209–213 ], but they are more likely to abuse their power, pursue their interests at the expense of the organization [ 207 , 214–217 ], disregard expert advice causing them to make poor decisions [ 205 ].

Classical process of power corrupting behavior leading to power loss.

Narcissist model of power corrupting behavior leading to power loss.

Another key takeaway from this paper is that no human being is completely immune to the corrupting effects of power. Results from a lab experiment suggest that power amplifies people’s dispositions in which powerful people with a firm moral identity are less likely to act in self-interest relative to those with a shaky moral identity [ 105 ]. One argument against the conclusions of this experiment is that power roles in lab experiments typically do not involve consequential outcomes or real decisions [ 4 ] and may not translate to power experiences in the real world [ 5 ]. Furthermore, the effects of power may change when it involves genuine interpersonal interactions compared to the arbitrary assignment into power groups, hypothetical scenarios, or anticipated interactions, as in a lab [ 5 ]. Another argument against this conclusion is the evidence that the virtue of honesty may not protect powerful people from the corruptive effect of power (Bendahan et al., 2015), Even with a strong moral identity, exposure to cash can provoke unethical intentions and behavior [ 218 ]. Even with a strong moral identity, it is still possible that in the presence of a threat to ego or power, seemingly good people with power can abuse power by acting aggressively [ 104 , 131 , 219 ]. Evidence suggests that in efforts to avoid a status or power loss powerful people may be willing to use coercion and go extra lengths even at others ‘expense [ 104 , 219 , 220 ]. Also, appetitive aggression, the nature of lust for violence, is an innate part of human behavior [ 221 ] and humans by nature have a high propensity for proactive aggression, a trait possessed in common with chimpanzees [ 222 ]. Indeed, human hands are evolved for improved manual dexterity and to be used as a club during fighting [ 223 ]. The neurobiology of human aggressive behavior has been extensively studied and includes alterations in brain regional volumes, metabolism, and connectivity in certain neural networks. Subregions of the prefrontal cortex, amygdala, insula, hippocampus, and basal ganglia play a critical role within these circuits and are linked to the biology of aggression [ 224 ]. So, while there are individual differences in propensity to abuse power including the use of violence and aggression [ 225 ], the monumentally corrupting effects of power can ensnare anyone. Taken together, when it comes to power, there are no good or bad people, there are only people.

Organizational social hierarchies play an important role in power abuse. Power hierarchies and pyramidal forms of leadership are integral aspects of social organizations to help create stability and order, but they attract narcissistic individuals [ 226 ] and can be harmful [ 227 ]. In many cases, these hierarchical structures can perpetuate power differences, creating bureaucratic conditions where there are strictly defined roles, with their distinction and importance overstressed. Being an individual with low power in such an environment can be challenging because of powerlessness and powerlessness can lead to self-dehumanization and feelings of worthlessness [ 121 ]. Such an environment can also stymie creativity, particularly for people with low power. Indeed, several lines of evidence indicate that power increases creativity [ 155 , 157 , 228 , 229 ]. However, when the power hierarchy is not fixed, people with low power display a flexible processing style and greater creativity [ 230 ]. So, organizations need to use a mixed model of classical hierarchy that incorporates flat hierarchy as much as possible to ensure that all members feel empowered and have a strong sense of belonging. Notably, an environment where people with low power feel empowered may result in decreased temporal discounting and increased lifetime savings [ 231 ]

It is important to note that there are some valid explanations for some of the behavior that powerholders display. Indeed, powerful people may pay less attention and be more vulnerable to stereotyping because they are attentionally overloaded leading to scarce cognitive resources [ 4 , 163 ]. Power is associated with a greater feeling of responsibility, and this may explain to some extent why it is associated with reduced social distance [ 5 ] Also, there are conflicting reports in the literature regarding the corrupting effect of power on behavior. Power used corruptly may play a vital role in maintaining cooperation in human society [ 8 , 232 ]. Power may not promote intransigence instead it can create internal conflict and dissonance leading to a change in attitude [ 157 ]. Instead of creating social distance, elevated power has been found to be associated with attentiveness in interacting with other people and greater feelings of being close to them relative to low power [ 5 ]. Experimental evidence suggests that high power is associated with more interpersonal sensitivity than low power [ 233 ]. Furthermore, high-status individuals have been found to display more prosocial behavior and to be more generous, trusting, and trustworthy compared to low-social-status individuals [ 234 ]. Power has been found to have no effects on attraction to rewards, which runs counter to the approach/inhibition theory that suggests that power enhances individuals’ interest in rewards [ 235 ]. Also, experimental evidence indicates that power under certain circumstances can result in less risky or more conservative behavior [ 236 ]. These findings indicate that more studies are needed to better understand the effects of power using better experiment designs with larger samples and more real-world studies. It also indicates that power abuse mitigating factors can play a critical role in curbing the corrupting effects of power.

The keys to maintaining and being effective with legitimate power are understanding its corrupting effects, continued relatability, collaboration, respect for peers and subordinates, and humility, which is predictive of positive outcomes [ 237 ]. The corrupting effect of power makes the need for checks and balances important to ensure the proper functioning and success of all individuals of a social group. One of the ways of mitigating power abuse is the consideration of predispositions, proper vetting to select ethical candidates, and training to increase social responsibility in people appointed to positions of power [ 25 ]. Organizational culture can play an important role in mitigating power abuse as it can shape and nurture power holders through values and culture that link power with being responsible [ 238 ]. Appropriate negative consequences must be put in place to deter the abuse of power. More must be done in the selection and training of individuals with power over highly vulnerable people with low power from abuse e.g., children, the institutionalized, etc. Physicians have power over patients in many respects [ 239 , 240 ] and the trend toward shared decision-making [ 241 ] must be strengthened using medical education training of physicians in the appropriate use of power and enactment of patient-centered therapeutic communications [ 242 ]. Boundary setting, vigilance, and regular training for teachers and organizational supervisors on the sexualizing effect of power on social interactions should be put in place to reduce the incidence of sexual harassment and inappropriate relationships. To mitigate the negative effects of the structural limits of accountability systems, allegations of wrongdoing by the powerful should be treated seriously and everyone particularly those in the lower power structure should be guaranteed access and resources to a fair and impartial higher authority for addressing wrongdoing without fear of retaliation. The allowance and development of a robust civil society that can leverage the power of peaceful protests to bring about change are crucial to pushing back on the excesses of power. The continued promotion of universal human rights and the creation of international institutions that hold powerful people accountable for blatant abuse of power is another important tool to deter and reduce the incidence of blatant abuses of power. In the international arena, laws and governing bodies must protect smaller nations from bullying, intimidation, and threats from larger and more powerful nations.

Finally, while intoxicating, power is fleeting, and it goes around. A person with immense power today may be lacking in power tomorrow. In the same vein, a person with little relevance today could ascend to a position of great power tomorrow. This should serve as a warning to everyone with power: always treat others with dignity, respect, and compassion, regardless of their current place in the power structure. As they say, the future is pregnant, and no one knows exactly what it will deliver.

Funding Statement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Disclosure statement

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Advertisement

Bullying and the Abuse of Power

• Original Article
• Published: 19 April 2023
• Volume 5 , pages 261–270, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Naomi C. Z. Andrews 1 ,
• Antonius H. N. Cillessen 2 ,
• Wendy Craig 3 ,
• Andrew V. Dane 4 &
• Anthony A. Volk   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4475-8134 1  

4925 Accesses

2 Citations

19 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Dan Olweus pioneered research on school bullying and identified the importance of, and risk factors associated with, bullying and victimization. In this paper, we conduct a narrative review of the critical notion of power within bullying. Specifically, we discuss Olweus’s definition of bullying and the role of a power imbalance in distinguishing bullying behavior from other forms of aggression. Next, we discuss the changing nature of research on aggression (and the adaptiveness of aggression) throughout the years, the important role of power in these changes, and how the concept of power in relationships has helped elucidate the developmental origins of bullying. We discuss bullying interventions and the potential opportunities for interventions to reduce bullying by making conditions for bullying less favorable and beneficial. Finally, we discuss bullying and the abuse of power that extends beyond the school context and emerges within families, workplaces, and governments. By recognizing and defining school bullying as an abuse of power and a violation of human rights, Olweus has laid the foundation and created the impetus for researching and addressing bullying. This review highlights the importance of examining abuses of power not only in school relationships, but across human relationships and society in general.

Similar content being viewed by others

Theoretical Perspectives and Two Explanatory Models of School Bullying

Adolescent susceptibility to deviant peer pressure: does gender matter.

Associations between Adolescents’ Interpersonal Relationships, School Well-being, and Academic Achievement during Educational Transitions

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Dan Olweus was a pioneer in identifying school bullying as a form of aggressive behavior that was important to research. Contrary to public opinion, Olweus argued that being bullied at school was a harmful behavior as opposed to an acceptable right of passage (Olweus, 1978 , 2013 ). Furthermore, he identified being victimized by bullying as a significant risk factor for child and youth development (Olweus, 1978 ). A recent (October, 2021) search of Google Scholar using the term “school bullying” returned almost one million results, indicating the paradigm-shifting importance of Olweus’s classification of school bullying behavior. Bullying is not a transitory phenomenon, but rather represents a fundamental aspect of human behavior (Volk et al., 2012 ) that had been largely overlooked prior to Olweus’s work (deliberately or not; see REF this issue). In this paper, we conduct a narrative review of relevant theory and evidence to argue that Olweus’s formulation of school bullying laid the foundation for developing critical methodological tools for assessing the aggressive abuse of power, and provided a framework for studying the function of bullying for perpetrators, anti-bullying interventions, and bullying beyond schools in broader societal contexts. We begin by examining the theoretical and historical contexts underlying Olweus’ emphasis on power in bullying. We then discuss how power influences anti-bullying interventions, followed by bullying and power beyond the school context. We end with a general conclusion and suggestions for future research.

Olweus’s Definition of School Bullying

Olweus did not just recognize bullying as a problem; he delineated what remains the most widely used definition of bullying (Olweus, 1993 ). According to one of his last papers on the topic, school bullying requires three criteria: repetitiveness, intentional harm-doing, and a power imbalance favoring the perpetrator (Olweus, 2013 ). These three criteria, however, are not equally important in defining bullying. With respect to repetitiveness, Olweus ( 2013 ) said that he “never thought of this as an absolutely necessary criterion” (p.757), as its inclusion was only to help differentiate bullying from trivial, unharmful incidents. Research has shown that repetitiveness is indeed linked to a greater degree of harm (Kaufman et al., 2020 ; Ybarra et al., 2014 ). But there are also unfortunate examples of single incidents of bullying that are quite harmful (e.g., hurtful or humiliating posts online), having in extreme cases resulted in the death of the victim (Andersson, 2000 ). Thus, repetition may function as a moderator of harm caused by bullying rather than being a primary definitional component (Volk et al., 2014 ).

Olweus ( 1993 ) identified intentionality as a critical component of bullying. Intentionality was included in the definition to distinguish between incidents that could cause harm or discomfort (e.g., one child painfully, but accidentally, knocks down another child in a game), but were not intended to be harmful (Olweus, 2013 ). Furthermore, intentionality suggests that youths who engage in bullying actively seek out their target. This definitional component imbues bullying with hostile intent, consistent with the defining criterion of aggression in general. As intent is challenging to measure, recent research has increasingly focused on studying goals instead of intent, given that goals are the tools with which people consciously or unconsciously engage in willful behavior (Dijksterhuis & Aarts, 2010 ). Research has identified several goals associated with bullying (Runions et al., 2018 ; Volk et al., 2022b ). A prominent goal is the accrual of dominance and power (Farrell & Dane, 2020 ; Kaufman et al., 2020 ; Malamut et al., 2020 ; Pouwels et al., 2018a , b ; Pronk et al., 2017 ).

A power imbalance is perhaps the most critical aspect of Olweus’s definition of bullying ( 2013 ) and the aspect he most emphasized in differentiating bullying from other forms of aggression ( 2010 ). Olweus argued that the bully has more power than the person being victimized, which makes it difficult for victims to defend themselves (Olweus, 1993 ). In contrast, bullying is not an aggressive encounter between two individuals of relatively equal power. If the targeted individual can mount an effective defense against the aggressor, this would be considered general aggression rather than bullying (Olweus, 1993 ). Multiple aspects of the power imbalance that defines bullying can be subjective, including the size/degree, nature/type, context, and expression of the power imbalance (Olweus, 2013 ). Furthermore, these can change over time, further complicating the relational nature of power (Pepler et al., 2006 ). The power imbalance can also vary across different bullying interactions and can be related to physical power, popularity, mental acuity, number of allies, and/or localized or broader social dynamics such as classroom norms (Cheng et al., 2011 ; Olweus, 1997 ; Pepler et al., 2006 ; Vaillancourt et al., 2003 ). In cases of cyberbullying, there are even more variables that can potentially influence power imbalances (e.g., technical skills; anonymity; Kowalski et al., 2014 ). It is worth nothing that Olweus viewed cyberbullying as a subcategory of bullying that required greater attention to details such as how power was captured online (Olweus, 2012 ) in order to overcome some of the ambiguities associated with the concept (Olweus & Limber, 2018 ). Heterogeneity in forms of power makes assessing the power imbalance a challenge for researchers, yet its centrality to Olweus’s conception of bullying ( 2013 ) makes it necessary to incorporate. Some researchers have suggested that this imbalance of power reflects changes in the likelihood of costs (e.g., retaliation) and benefits (e.g., status gains) associated with bullying in comparison to other forms of aggression (Garandeau et al., 2014 ; van den Berg et al., 2019 ; Volk et al., 2014 , 2022a , b ).

Why Is Power so Important?

Humans are a deeply social species who evolved large brains to both compete and cooperate with other large-brained individuals to acquire and maintain power (Maestripieri, 2012 ). Similar to many other species, humans have evolved dominance hierarchies that allow for the navigation of power in relationships (Johnson et al., 2012 ). Power plays a pivotal role not only in peer relationships at school, but also across human relationships and society in general (Keltner, 2016 ). In this light, Olweus’s emphasis on the abuse of power captures behavior that is important beyond the school context. Abuses of power lie at the heart of the human experience. Abuses of power characterize, allow for, and can even encourage sibling bullying (Wolke et al., 2015 ), workplace bullying (Vredenburgh & Brender, 1998 ), and intimate partner abuse (Wincentak et al., 2017 ). The evidence is clear that the aggressive abuse of power (i.e., bullying) creates stress that is as toxic to child and adolescent health (Lambe et al., 2019 ) as it is to adult health (Xu et al., 2019 ). Thus, bullying goes beyond Olweus’s assertion of it being a violation of children’s human rights (Assembly,  1989 ; Olweus & Breivik, 2014 ) to being a violation of general human rights, as it also applies to broader levels of social, political, and economic bullying behavior. Illuminating and countering the deliberate abuse of power is the core focus of important recent societal movements, including #MeToo (Kende et al., 2020 ) and BlackLivesMatter (Clayton, 2018 ), as well as movements related to civil rights (Clayton, 2018 ), economic monopolies (Massoc, 2020 ), climate change (Pettenger, 2007 ), the COVID-19 pandemic (Smith & Judd, 2020 ), and growing wealth inequality (Adam Cobb, 2016 ; Kalleberg et al., 1981 ). In all these cases, the difficulty of acknowledging sometimes subjective power imbalances lies at the heart of significant injustices that can take years, if not decades, to recognize and address (Clayton, 2018 ).

The importance of understanding the abuse of power in these domains makes Olweus’s ground-breaking work on schoolyard bullying even more salient in today’s world than it was decades ago. The need to understand the developmental origins of power and its exploitation goes beyond the schoolyard and is central to solving critical social, legal, political, economic, and environmental problems today. Bullying lies at the intersection of these issues, as diverse abuses of power negatively affect the lives of people around the world in many different ways (Elgar et al., 2019 ). The recognition of a power imbalance being central for bullying was not only critical for the definition of bullying (Olweus, 1993 ); it also allowed researchers studying the development of aggression to consider the possibility that aggression is not simply maladaptive (Asarnow & Callan, 1985 ), but rather bullying aggression could potentially be adaptive under certain contexts (Olweus, 1993 ; Volk et al., 2012 , 2022b ). Thus, we next explore the historical and theoretical importance of Olweus’s conceptions of bullying and power for the field of child and youth school aggression and how these conceptions aligned with a shifting view of the adaptiveness of aggression.

The Development of School Bullying and Its Study

An important factor in the increase of research on child and adolescent peer relationships in the 1980s was concerns about the occurrence of aggression and antisocial behavior among youth (including conduct disorder and crime) and the fact that this behavior is almost never conducted by youths alone, but in interactions with peers. In these years, aggression was seen as the primary determinant of peer rejection (dislike), and thus associated with poor social skills and negative repercussions in the peer group (see, e.g., Asarnow et al., 1985 ; Asher & Coie, 1990 ). In the context of this work, distinctions were made between various forms and functions of aggression, most notably physical versus relational aggression and proactive versus reactive aggression (e.g., Little et al., 2003 ). Bullying was seen as a form of proactive aggression (Dodge & Coie, 1987 ) and a major cause for peer rejection, dislike, and maladjustment in various domains (Newcomb et al., 1993 ), most markedly, low social status. Olweus ( 1993 ) notably disagreed with what was then the dominant perception of bullies as insecure and socially unskilled. In contrast, he argued that their behavior was power-seeking, reward-driven (i.e., potentially adaptive), and sustained by average or high self-esteem as well as anxiety.

Not long after these arguments, the general picture of aggression in the study of child and adolescent peer relationships dramatically changed towards Olweus’s conceptions when researchers became interested in popularity (LaFontana & Cillessen, 1998 ; Parkhurst & Hopmeyer, 1998 ). Originally, in the assessment of peer relations, researchers focused on sociometrically assessing who youth “like the most” and “like the least” in their classroom or grade (Coie et al., 1982 ). In this era of peer relations research, high status referred to peer acceptance and low status to peer rejection. Indeed, all forms and functions of aggression correlated negatively with acceptance and positively with rejection. However, when peer relations researchers began to also ask youths who they thought were “most popular” and “least popular,” the picture of the role of aggression in the peer group quickly became more nuanced. Rodkin et al. ( 2000 ) identified two types of high-status peers: those who are well-liked and prosocial (“models”) and those who are seen as cool and aggressive (“toughs”). There is clear evidence that peer acceptance and popularity are not identical (see, for a meta-analysis, van den Berg et al., 2020 ), and a robust finding is the reversal of the correlation of measures of aggression and antisocial behavior with peer acceptance versus popularity.

As predicted by Olweus ( 1993 ), this includes measures of bullying. The consistently positive correlation between popularity and bullying at school suggests that bullying offers a degree of adaptiveness. Consistent with both sociometric findings and Olweus’s early assertions ( 1993 ), Sutton and colleagues ( 1999 ) argued against the “social skills deficit” perspective of bullying and instead suggested that bullying is associated with social cognitive skills and theory of mind (Shakoor et al., 2012 ) that are required to manipulate and organize others, as well as to inflict harm in subtle ways while avoiding detection. This perspective has led to a more nuanced picture of bullying (particularly as practiced by “pure” bullies versus bully-victims; Volk et al., 2014 ) as a complex behavior that includes social skills and is associated with high status and rewards in the peer group (Berger, 2007 ; Pouwels et al., 2018a , b ; Reijntjes et al., 2013 ). These same behaviors and traits often characterize cyberbullies (Kowalski et al., 2014 ; Olweus, 2012 ) and appear to persist across cultures (Smith et al., 2016 ). These findings are consistent with Olweus’s ( 1993 ) conceptualization of bullies as ringleaders who are capable of using social power to influence the social roles played by those around them, particularly those who would assist them (O’Connell et al., 1999 ; Salmivalli, 2010 ; Stellwagen & Kerig, 2013 ). This role-oriented approach to bullying has been validated by a separate body of peer relations research that has emphasized the importance of bullying power imbalances in promoting not only different roles among peers (e.g., reinforcing versus defending), but also in the adaptiveness of those ancillary bullying roles (Garandeau et al., 2014 ; Lambe et al., 2017 ; Spadafora et al., 2020 ).

One question that has intrigued researchers is whether the association between bullying and social power emerges for the first time in adolescence or already exists at earlier ages. On the one hand, there is evidence that the associations of peer acceptance and popularity with bullying and its underlying motives change from middle childhood to early adolescence (Caravita & Cillessen, 2012 ). On the other hand, researchers with an evolutionary perspective have argued that the association between aggression and power has long been observed among animals, and that it is not limited to adolescence, but exists in peer groups from a very early age on, including preschool groups (Hawley, 2002 , 2003 ; Kolbert & Crothers, 2003 ; Pellegrini, 2001 ). Indeed, among preschoolers, bullying perpetration is associated with fewer social costs than general aggressive behavior (Ostrov et al., 2019 ). Hence, bullying should be placed in a life-span developmental perspective, not only looking backward from adolescence into its earlier developmental roots, but also forward. The persistence of bullying into adulthood (i.e., a failure to “grow out” of the behavior) highlights the contribution of Olweus’s focus on bullying and power and the need for interventions to reduce bullying by increasing the costs and diminishing the benefits for perpetrators of bullying (Olweus & Limber, 2010 ).

Power and Bullying Interventions

In drawing attention to bullying as a particular type of aggression characterized by an imbalance of power, Olweus identified a challenging behavior for researchers and practitioners to address through interventions. As noted earlier, the costs of bullying are lower than other types of aggression, as bullying is done selectively under favorable circumstances in which the victim is unlikely to retaliate, be defended by bystanders, or evoke sympathy from peers (Veenstra et al., 2010 ; Volk et al., 2014 ). Furthermore, although bullies are disliked by some peers and at risk for a range of antisocial behaviors, developmental research has supported Olweus’s view that bullying is goal-directed aggression that can be beneficial for some individuals in some circumstances (Olweus, 1993 ), especially as a means to signal attractive or intimidating attributes to bystanders. This is evidenced by positive associations with popularity, number of dating and sexual partners, dominance, and access to resources (e.g., Dane et al., 2017 ; Reijntjes et al., 2013 , 2018 ; Volk et al., 2022b ). Reducing a behavior that affords a favorable cost–benefit ratio is, at least in the short term, a daunting task.

Nevertheless, Olweus took on this challenge by developing the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, a comprehensive whole-school approach that addressed bullying in schools with school-wide, classroom, individual, and community components (Limber et al., 2018 ). The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program (OBPP) was designed to take a social ecological approach to bullying, by restructuring the school environment to shift power imbalances by reducing opportunities and rewards for bullying. The goal was to build a sense of community based on values of equity and inclusion among students and adults in the school environment (Olweus, 1993 ). These principles are then translated into specific interventions to promote the prosocial use of power at the individual, classroom, school, and community levels and to create a climate in which all children feel safe and included (Olweus & Limber, 2010 ). Specifically, teachers and other adults were encouraged to set limits on bullying, model and reinforce appropriate behavior, and provide appropriate consequences for bullying and rule violations, especially by supervising settings where bullying was likely to occur (Limber et al., 2018 ). The OBPP thus has a broad range of components that highlight the importance of operating at different ecological levels (Bronfenbrenner, 1979 ). It is worth noting that while bullying is ubiquitous across cultures, there are cross-cultural differences in the rates of bullying, its forms, and its correlates (Smith et al., 2016 ). These differences demonstrate how bullying can, and does, respond to different culturally mediated costs and rewards (Volk et al., 2022b ). Evaluations of OBPP have demonstrated that changing environments and addressing power imbalances among students, peer groups, and in classrooms have been associated with reductions of bullying behavior (Limber et al., 2018 ).

Recent meta-analytic evidence confirms that the most promising means to reduce bullying has been when interventions were able to make conditions for bullying less favorable through changes in multiple ecological contexts (Gaffney et al., 2021 ). Specifically, interventions that provide all members of a school community, including peers and parents, with informal opportunities to reduce the benefits that may be achieved through the exploitation of a power imbalance, had larger effects on reducing bullying and victimization than programs in which these aspects were absent (Gaffney et al., 2021 ). Conversely, anti-bullying programs that focused on improving individual youths’ deficits in socio-emotional skills such as empathy, problem-solving skills, and self-control were less effective in reducing bullying perpetration and victimization, possibly because these programs ignored the ecological contexts that support the utility of power in bullying. These results may reflect Olweus’s view of bullying as a predatory exploitation of an advantage in power ( 1993 ), which suggests that a lack of social skills may not be a contributing factor. These findings also highlight that bullying is a problem that transcends individual relationships, which Olweus noted ( 2014 ) and has been implemented in other successful socio-ecological interventions (e.g., KiVa; Gaffney et al., 2019a , b ).

Although interventions that focus on changing contexts to make the results of bullying less favorable have had some success, research has revealed several challenges and limitations. Despite being beneficial overall, anti-bullying interventions have only been modestly effective, on average, reducing perpetration by 19–20% and victimization by 15–16% (Gaffney et al., 2019a , b ), and some have proven to be ineffective or iatrogenic (Merrell et al., 2008 ). Anti-bullying interventions are generally less effective with adolescents, who may value some of the social benefits of bullying more than children, such as attracting dating partners and gaining popularity (e.g., Yeager et al., 2015 ). These programs have also been less effective with popular youth (Garandeau et al., 2014 ), who may be unwilling to forego the benefits they can receive by exploiting a power advantage derived from high status. In addition, interventions that encourage bystanders to defend victims from bullies are less effective in reducing victimization than programs in which this is absent (Gaffney et al., 2021 ), which may demonstrate the challenge of confronting powerful perpetrators. Furthermore, anti-bullying interventions for cyberbullying, though effective, produce even more modest reductions in bullying perpetration (10–15%) and victimization (14%) than programs targeting traditional bullying (Gaffney et al., 2019a , b ). The results with cyberbullying interventions identify a new challenge—adapting anti-bullying approaches inspired by Olweus’s work to bullying in a cyber context in which anonymity, disinhibition due to a lack of face-to-face interactions, and obstacles to parental monitoring limit opportunities to make online conditions for bullying less favorable (Kowalski et al., 2014 ).

In addition, a failure to acknowledge the power imbalance inherent in bullying can facilitate the common harmful recommendation by adults and clinical practitioners: victims should fight back (see, for further discussion, Lochman et al., 2012 ). This lack of awareness about the role of power may also explain why it is the most common strategy reported by children and an approach they believe will be successful (Black et al., 2010 ). Unfortunately, while direct retaliation might protect an individual, it does not remove the bully’s option of finding another potentially weaker victim who lacks protection or the strength to defend themselves (Veenstra et al., 2010 ), or of retaliating when the power is once again back in the bully’s favor (e.g., when the victim’s friends are gone; Spadafora et al., 2020 ). Moreover, it is not always a feasible option for a victim to fight back or contact an adult or other appropriate authority figure. In fact, research demonstrates that fighting back can make the problem worse, as it may motivate the bully to avoid losing face or protect their power (Craig & Pepler, 1997 ; Sulkowski et al., 2014 ; Volk et al., 2014 ) and thus retaliation can become iatrogenic. Among adults, a failure to recognize power imbalances can lead to blaming victims for not helping themselves (Gupta et al., 2020 ; Lutgen-Sandvik, 2006 ). Finally, a belief that fighting back is all that is required to eliminate it reinforces the idea of bullying as a harmless right of passage—the very antithesis of Olweus’s message ( 1993 ).

Recent innovations in anti-bullying intervention research have sought to address the challenges that limit effectiveness by not only focusing on preventing bullying, but on fostering prosocial behavior (Ellis et al., 2016 ), in line with Olweus’s emphasis on modeling and reinforcing appropriate behavior in the OBPP anti-bullying intervention (Limber et al., 2018 ). Rather than discouraging bullies from pursuing valued benefits (e.g., popularity, romantic partners), this intervention acknowledges the goal-directed nature of bullying and provides structured opportunities for youth to experience using prosocial behavior as an equally effective means to obtain desired goals (Ellis et al., 2016 ). When combined with existing intervention components that are known to be effective (see above), such innovations offer a roadmap for diverting students’ behavior away from exploiting power through bullying to achieve personal gains and instead encouraging prosocial conduct that can yield similar but mutual benefits to those who cooperate with one another. Thus, Olweus’s discussion of bullying and power has had important implications for the way that bullying has not only been studied, but in how bullying interventions have been designed. Critically though, we view Olweus’s ideas about bullying and power as having an important impact above and beyond schools.

Bullying and Power Beyond the School

School bullying thus remains a serious issue, but it is likely to remain an unsolvable issue if children continue to see successful examples of bullying modeled in homes, relationships, workplaces, and governments. Bullying is a developmental phenomenon that extends beyond the school years. As individuals age, other forms of developmentally relevant aggressive behaviors emerge (dating violence, sexual harassment, workplace bullying) and are implemented to exert power, harm, and influence (Farrel & Vaillancourt, 2021 ; Pepler et al., 2006 ). A developmental perspective shows that bullying behavior, and the rewards associated with it, do not stop in adolescence but persist into the social contexts of adults. Furthermore, the social ecological perspective highlights the importance of external ecological impacts, such as parents, communities, and governments, and how bullying and the abuse of power are an issue that deeply involves, but also transcends, the school setting. For example, when consistent efforts towards altering the power structure were abandoned at higher ecological levels (e.g., government and community support), the Norwegian OBPP failed to have significant effects and bullying returned to pre-intervention levels (Roland, 2011 ). These multiple layers of factors that can influence and promote imbalances of power and bullying beyond schools and into many other aspects of child and adult life reveal an important reason why bullying has proven so challenging to eliminate.

It is thus no mistake that Olweus called on adults to actively participate in bullying interventions (Olweus & Limber, 2010 ). Bullying behaviors modeled by persons in positions of leadership show how school bullying is a complex ecological issue that also involves adults’ behavior. We take his message that school bullying is harmful and use it to encourage school bullying researchers to take steps towards a broader understanding of the abuse of power not only among children, but in diverse settings and individuals across the lifespan. For example, in a longitudinal study of a purple (mixed Republican and Democrat) state before and after Trump’s election, Huang and Cornell ( 2019 ) found an increase in students’ reports of being bullied, as well as teasing about racial ethnicity in schools, following Trump’s victory in 2016. Interestingly, this increase was found only in parts of the state with a Republican (Trump) voter preference in the 2016 election, presumably due to youths emulating their locally popular President. The societal rewards of bullying continue across the lifespan, including financial, business, and political power for adults (e.g., our previous list of modern injustices).

The nursing profession, for example, has perhaps been more active than any other in identifying internal and external issues of professional bullying (Wilson, 2016 ). Using Olweus’s conceptualization of bullying, researchers have identified how nurses face serious mental, physical, and financial risks from bullying by fellow nurses, doctors, and even patients (Wilson, 2016 ). Bullying is found in many other workplaces, leading to the creation of anti-bullying interventions that aim to reduce it. These adult interventions are often modeled on principles discovered in school bullying research, suggesting that work done with children can also apply to adults, and vice versa (Gupta et al., 2020 ). As noted earlier, there has been a growing outcry against abuses of power in the adult world that parallel the calls for action against bullying in schools, albeit with less broad support (Klein, 2014 ). The resistance to change in the adult abuse of power in many ways mirrors the stubborn resistance to decreasing school bullying through intervention efforts (Gaffney et al., 2019a , b , 2021 ). It is likely that some of the resistance among adults is similar to that among children—groups and individuals who have power are often loath to share it because of the benefits it affords. That selfish lack of support by those with power is perhaps one of the reasons that adults have failed to address their own abuses of power, alongside a lack of determination to vigorously fight against school bullying (Roland, 2011 ).

On the other hand, evidence is now clear how bullying research, as inspired by Olweus’s work, has been received by the broader public. As noted, a Google Scholar search of “bullying” returned one million results, but a general Google search of “bullying” returned 4.75 billion results (October, 2021). Bullying has clearly captured the attention of both academics and the general public. We argue that the reason for this attention to bullying is that, although humans can show a capacity for bullying and the abuse of power (Pellegrini, 2001 ), they can also show a deeply egalitarian, negative response to the abuse of power imbalances (Klein, 2014 ).

This bias towards the fair use of power appears to be both biologically predisposed and culturally reinforced. From a biological perspective, even infants appear to tell the difference between a respectful leader versus an abusive, bullying, leader (Margoni et al., 2018 ). In every hunter-gatherer culture observed, social leveling and/or egalitarian mechanisms exist to minimize power imbalances (e.g., Briggs, 1970 ; Marlowe, 2010 ; Marshall, 2013 ). Cross-culturally, there is wide support for underdogs, particularly in the context of promoting equal contests (Goldschmied et al., 2018 ). This universality, combined with its appearance early in development, has led researchers to suggest that a bias against power imbalances, and in favor of egalitarian or leveling mechanisms, is partly due to an evolved adaptation (Cheng, 2020 ; Klein, 2014 ). Thus, we argue that bullying research has been extremely effective in drawing attention to issues of exploiting an imbalance of power because many individuals across cultures have a strong bias against inequality, particularly in the context of aggressive competition.

An interest in power in relation to human behavior is not unique to bullying research. Researchers and theorists from a wide range of fields have been interested in power for decades, including philosophy, political science, sociology, feminist studies, and psychology (Allen, 1998 ; Bachrach & Baratz, 1962 ; Dahl, 1957 ; Emerson, 1962 ; Foucault, 1982 ; Galinsky et al., 2003 ; Keltner et al., 2003 ; Lukes, 1986 ). In many of these works, power is considered ubiquitous and fundamental to human behavior (Adler, 1966 ; Dahl, 1957 ; Emerson, 1962 ; Foucault, 1982 ; Keltner et al., 2003 ), and the pursuit of power is seen as a “recurrent and pervasive challenge faced by individuals in all human societies” (Cheng et al., 2013 , p. 103). In these various disciplines, power has been defined slightly differently, though there are general themes. Power refers to the ability or capacity to control and modify others’ states, or to control resources (both their own and others’) without interference (Dahl, 1957 ; Galinsky et al., 2003 ; Keltner et al., 2003 ; Lukes, 1986 ). Furthermore, power is understood as a property of relationships, rather than individuals; power is always relative to whom one has power over (Dahl, 1957 ; Emerson, 1962 ). Finally, power is multidimensional. This means that there are various dimensions upon which one can hold or exemplify power (Adler, 1966 ; Pratto & Espinoza, 2001 ; Rodkin et al., 2015 ; Volk et al., 2014 ). Even a brief search of these disparate literatures reveals the pervasive influence of Olweus’s descriptions of power (e.g., its subjectivity) as well as its use in bullying (e.g., controlling others; Olweus, 1993 , 2010 , 2014 ).

In addition, these literatures agree with Olweus ( 2014 ) that there are different ways of using power that include both prosocial (e.g., defending) and antisocial (e.g., bullying) behaviors. As such, there are different ways to gain power or wield one’s power. Individuals can gain power using altruistic means, building coalitions, gaining allies, being positive leaders, and supporting group cooperation (Cheng, 2020 ; Cheng et al., 2013 ; Farrell & Dane, 2020 ; Henrich & Gil-White, 2001 ; Johnson et al., 2012 ; O’Gorman et al., 2009 ). For example, while Foucault discussed pathological forms of power, he contrasted them with pastoral power that emphasizes the needs of others, thus promoting the community as a whole (Foucault, 1982 ). Thus, different literatures describe individuals with power as using it in both prosocial ways (e.g., defenders, liked peers, prestigious individuals, positive leaders) and/or antisocial ways (e.g., bullies, popular-aggressive peers, dominant individuals, feared tyrants). This reveals that power itself is not inherently good or bad. Instead, it may be our use of power that best illustrates the importance of bullying research and the need to understand and promote the prosocial uses of power. In this light, Olweus et al. ( 2018 ) emphasized that intervention and its aims should be seen as “principles, procedures and mechanisms designed to create a safe and humane school environment where bully-victim problems are systematically addressed, handled and prevented” (p.115).

Conclusions

Despite the importance of understanding power in school bullying, we acknowledge the difficulties of measuring and assessing power in schools and beyond. Because power is multidimensional, relational (i.e., relative to the person one has power over) and systemic (certain individuals are privileged in society), it is extremely complex to assess at all these levels. Yet, if we can develop accurate and reliable measures of relational power in children and adolescence and beyond, we have the potential to better understand and ameliorate human relationships at every level.

By repeatedly calling attention to the importance of power in school bullying, Olweus identified the means and motive for humanity to address the toxic abuses of power not only towards school children, but in society at large. This abuse of power has crucial implications for a vast array of interdisciplinary (and transdisciplinary) research and practices. We therefore urgently call for our colleagues studying school bullying and power to consider not only how that knowledge can be applied beyond the school, but also how knowledge of power and bullying beyond the school can help to prevent it within schools. We believe that Olweus himself was moving towards (2014) this recommendation. As scholars of bullying and power, it is critical to work with schools and communities to facilitate change and ensure that all children and youth are safe from peer abuse where they live, learn, and play. Future bullying research must connect with other areas of research on human behavior to foster a greater understanding of how to ameliorate the abuse of power in our schools and our societies.

Adam Cobb, J. (2016). How firms shape income inequality: Stakeholder power, executive decision making, and the structuring of employment relationships. Academy of Management Review, 41 (2), 324–348.

Article   Google Scholar  

Adler, A. (1966). The psychology of power. Journal of Individual Psychology, 22 , 166–172.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Allen, A. (1998). Rethinking power. Hypatia, 13 (1), 21–40.

Andersson, E. (2000). Dead boys’ dad grills student at inquest. The Globe and Mail . https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/dead-boys-dad-grills-student-at-inquest/article25457796/ . Retrieved September 24, 2022.

Asarnow, J. R., & Callan, J. W. (1985). Boys with peer adjustment problems: Social cognitive processes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53 (1), 80–87.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Asher, S. R., & Coie, J. D. (1990). Peer rejection in childhood . Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar  

Assembly, U. G. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. United Nations, Treaty Series, 1577 (3), 1–23.

Bachrach, P., & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. The American Political Science Review, 56 (4), 947–952.

Berger, K. S. (2007). Update on bullying at school: Science forgotten? Developmental Review, 27 (1), 90–126.

Black, S., Weinles, D., & Washington, E. (2010). Victim strategies to stop bullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 8 , 138–147.

Briggs, J. L. (1970). Never in anger: Portrait of an Eskimo family . Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development . Harvard University Press.

Caravita, S. C. S., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2012). Agentic or communal? Associations between interpersonal goals, popularity, and bullying in middle childhood and early adolescence. Social Development, 21 , 376–395.

Cheng, J. T. (2020). Dominance, prestige, and the role of leveling in human social hierarchy and equality. Current Opinion in Psychology, 33 , 238–244.

Cheng, Y. Y., Chen, L. M., Ho, H. C., & Cheng, C. L. (2011). Definitions of school bullying in Taiwan: A comparison of multiple perspectives. School Psychology International, 32 (3), 227–243.

Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. (2013). Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104 (1), 103–125.

Clayton, D. M. (2018). Black lives matter and the civil rights movement: A comparative analysis of two social movements in the United States. Journal of Black Studies, 49 (5), 448–480.

Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18 , 557–569.

Craig, W., & Pepler, D. J. (1997). Observations of bullying and victimization in the schoolyard. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 13 , 41–60.

Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 2 , 201–215.

Dane, A. V., Marini, Z. A., Volk, A. A., & Vaillancourt, T. (2017). Physical and relational bullying and victimization: Differential relations with adolescent dating and sexual behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 43 (2), 111–122.

Dijksterhuis, A., & Aarts, H. (2010). Goals, attention, and (un) consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 61 , 467–490.

Dodge, K. A., & Coie, J. D. (1987). Social-information-processing factors in reactive and proactive aggression in children’s peer groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53 , 1146–1158.

Elgar, F. J., Gariepy, G., Dirks, M., Walsh, S. D., Molcho, M., Cosma, A., & Craig, W. (2019). Association of early-life exposure to income inequality with bullying in adolescence in 40 countries. JAMA Pediatrics , 173 (7), e191181-e191181.

Ellis, B. J., Volk, A. A., Gonzalez, J. M., & Embry, D. D. (2016). The meaningful roles intervention: An evolutionary approach to reducing bullying and increasing prosocial behavior. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 26 (4), 622–637.

Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27 (1), 31–41.

Farrell, A. H., & Dane, A. V. (2020). Bullying, victimization, and prosocial resource control strategies: Differential relations with dominance and alliance formation. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 14 (3), 270.

Farrell, A. H., & Vailancourt, T. (2021). The impact of childhood bullying trajectories on young adulthood antisocial trajectories. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 1–15.

Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8 , 777–795.

Gaffney, H., Farrington, D. P., Espelage, D. L., & Ttofi, M. M. (2019a). Are cyberbullying intervention and prevention programs effective? A systematic and meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45 , 134–153.

Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2019b). Evaluating the effectiveness of school-bullying prevention programs: An updated meta-analytical review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 45 , 111–133.

Gaffney, H., Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2021). What works in anti-bullying programs? Analysis of effective intervention components. Journal of School Psychology, 85 , 37–56.

Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C. (2003). From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85 (3), 453–466.

Garandeau, C. F., Lee, I. A., & Salmivalli, C. (2014). Differential effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on popular and unpopular bullies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35 (1), 44–50.

Goldschmied, N., Galily, Y., & Keith, K. (2018). Evidence for cross-cultural support for the underdog: Is the affiliation driven by fairness and competence assessments? Frontiers in Psychology, 9 (2246), 1–7.

Gupta, P., Gupta, U., & Wadhwa, S. (2020). Known and unknown aspects of workplace bullying: A systematic review of recent literature and future research agenda. Human Resource Development Review, 19 (3), 263–308.

Hawley, P. H. (2002). Social dominance and prosocial and coercive strategies of resource control in preschoolers. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26 , 167–176.

Hawley, P. H. (2003). Prosocial and coercive configurations of resource control in early adolescence: A case for the well-adapted Machiavellian. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 49 , 279–309.

Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22 (3), 165–196.

Huang, F. L., & Cornell, D. G. (2019). School teasing and bullying after the presidential election. Educational Researcher, 48 (2), 69–83.

Johnson, S. L., Leedom, L. J., & Muhtadie, L. (2012). The dominance behavioral system and psychopathology: Evidence from self-report, observational, and biological studies. Psychological Bulletin, 138 (4), 692–743.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kalleberg, A. L., Wallace, M., & Althauser, R. P. (1981). Economic segmentation, worker power, and income inequality. American Journal of Sociology, 87 (3), 651–683.

Kaufman, T. M., Huitsing, G., & Veenstra, R. (2020). Refining victims’ self-reports on bullying: Assessing frequency, intensity, power imbalance, and goal-directedness. Social Development, 29 (2), 375–390.

Keltner, D. (2016). The power paradox: How we gain and lose influence . Penguin.

Keltner, D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Anderson, C. (2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110 , 265–284.

Kende, A., Nyúl, B., Lantos, N. A., Hadarics, M., Petlitski, D., Kehl, J., & Shnabel, N. (2020). A needs-based support for# MeToo: Power and morality needs shape women’s and men’s support of the campaign. Frontiers in Psychology, 11 (593), 1–19.

Klein, S. (2014). Survival of the nicest: How altruism made us human and why it pays to get along . The Experiment.

Kolbert, J. B., & Crothers, L. M. (2003). Bullying and evolutionary psychology: The dominance hierarchy among students and implications for school personnel. Journal of School Violence, 2 (3), 73–91.

Kowalski, R. M., Guimetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattaner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140 (4), 1073–1137.

LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (1998). The nature of children’s stereotypes of popularity. Social Development, 7 , 301–320.

Lambe, L. J., Hudson, C. C., Craig, W. M., & Pepler, D. J. (2017). Does defending come with a cost? Examining the psychosocial correlates of defending behavior among bystanders of bullying in a Canadian sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 65 , 112–123.

Lambe, L. J., Craig, W. M., & Hollenstein, T. (2019). Blunted physiological stress reactivity among youth with a history of bullying and victimization: Links to depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 47 (12), 1981–1993.

Limber, S. P., Olweus, D., Wang, W., Masiello, M., & Breivik, K. (2018). Evaluation of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program: A large scale study of US students in grades 3–11. Journal of School Psychology, 69 , 56–72.

Little, T. D., Jones, S. M., Henrich, C. C., & Hawley, P. H. (2003). Disentangling the “whys” from the “whats” of aggressive behavior. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27 , 122–133.

Lochman, J. E., Powell, N. P., Whidby, J. M., Fitzgerald, D. P. (2012). Aggression in children PC Kendall Eds Child and adolescent therapy: Cognitive-behavioral procedures . Guilford Press. 27( 60).

Lukes, S. (Ed.). (1986). Power . NYU Press.

Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and …: Quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Communication Monographs, 73 (4), 406–433.

Maestripieri, D. (2012). Games primates play: An undercover investigation of the evolution and economics of human relationships . Basic Books.

Malamut, S. T., van den Berg, Y. H. M., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2020). Dyadic nominations of bullying: Comparing types of bullies and their victims. Aggressive Behavior, 46 (3), 232–243.

Margoni, F., Baillargeon, R., & Surian, L. (2018). Infants distinguish between leaders and bullies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (38), E8835–E8843.

Marlowe, F. (2010). The Hadza: Hunter-gatherers of Tanzania . University of California Press.

Marshall, L. (2013). The! Harvard University Press.

Massoc, E. (2020). Banks, power, and political institutions: The divergent priorities of European states towards “too-big-to-fail” banks. The cases of competition in retail banking and the banking structural reform. Business and politics , 22 (1), 135–160.

Merrell, K. W., Gueldner, B. A., Ross, S. W., & Isava, D. M. (2008). How effective are school bullying intervention programs? A meta-analysis of intervention research. School Psychology Quarterly, 23 (1), 26.

Newcomb, A. F., Bukowski, W. M., & Pattee, L. (1993). Children’s peer relations: A meta-analytic review of popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average sociometric status. Psychological Bulletin, 113 , 99–128.

O’Connell, P. A. U. L., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. (1999). Peer involvement in bullying: Insights and challenges for intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 22 (4), 437–452.

O’Gorman, R., Henrich, J., & van Vugt, M. (2009). Constraining free riding in public goods games: Designated solitary punishers can sustain human cooperation. Proceedings of the Royal Society b: Biological Sciences, 276 (1655), 323–329.

Olweus D. (1978). Aggression in the schools. Bullies and whipping boys . Hemisphere.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do . Wiley-Blackwell.

Olweus, D. (1997). Bully/victim problems in school. Irish Journal of Psychology, 18 (2), 170–190.

Olweus, D. (2010). Understanding and researching bullying: Some critical issues. In S. R. Jimerson, S. M. Swearer, & D. L. Espelage (Eds.), Handbook of bullying in schools: An international perspective (pp. 9–33). Routledge.

Olweus, D. (2012). Cyberbullying: An overrated phenomenon? European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9 , 520–538.

Olweus, D. (2013). School bullying: Development and some important challenges. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 9 , 751–780.

Olweus, D., & Breivik, K. (2014). Plight of victims of school bullying: The opposite of well-being. Handbook of child well-being (pp. 2593–2616). Springer.

Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80 (1), 124.

Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2018). Some problems with cyberbullying research. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19 , 139–143.

Ostrov, J. M., Kamper-DeMarco, K. E., Blakely-McClure, S. J., Perry, K. J., & Mutignani, L. (2019). Prospective associations between aggression/bullying and adjustment in preschool: Is general aggression different from bullying behavior? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28 (9), 2572–2585.

Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18 , 125–144.

Pellegrini, A. D. (2001). The roles of dominance and bullying in the development of early heterosexual relationships. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2 (2–3), 63–73.

Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Connolly, J. A., Yuile, A., McMaster, L., & Jiang, D. (2006). A developmental perspective on bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32 (4), 376–384.

Pettenger, M. E. (Ed.). (2007). The social construction of climate change: Power, knowledge, norms, discourses . Ashgate Publishing.

Pouwels, J. L., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2018a). A developmental perspective on popularity and the group process of bullying. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 43 , 64–70.

Pouwels, J. L., van Noorden, T. H. J., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2018b). The participant roles of bullying in different grades: Prevalence and social status profiles. Social Development, 27 (4), 732–747.

Pratto, F., & Espinoza, P. (2001). Gender, ethnicity, and power. Journal of Social Issues, 57 , 763–780.

Pronk, J., Lee, N. C., Sandhu, D., Kaur, K., Kaur, S., Olthof, T., & Goossens, F. A. (2017). Associations between Dutch and Indian adolescents’ bullying role behavior and peer-group status: Cross-culturally testing an evolutionary hypothesis. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 41 (6), 735–742.

Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., van de Schoot, R., Aleva, L., & van der Meulen, M. (2013). Costs and benefits of bullying in the context of the peer group: A three wave longitudinal analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41 , 1217–1229.

Reijntjes, A., Vermande, M., Olthof, T., Goossens, F. A., Vink, G., Aleva, L., & van der Meulen, M. (2018). Differences between resource control types revisited: A short term longitudinal study. Social Development, 27 (1), 187–200.

Rodkin, P. C., Espelage, D. L., & Hanish, L. D. (2015). A relational framework for understanding bullying: Developmental antecedents and outcomes. American Psychologist, 70 (4), 311–321.

Rodkin, P. C., Farmer, T. W., Pearl, R., & Van Acker, R. (2000). Heterogeneity of popular boys: Antisocial and prosocial configurations. Developmental Psychology, 36 , 14–24.

Roland, E. (2011). The broken curve: Effects of the Norwegian manifesto against bullying. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35 (5), 383–388.

Runions, K. C., Salmivalli, C., Shaw, T., Burns, S., & Cross, D. (2018). Beyond the reactive-proactive dichotomy: Rage, revenge, reward, and recreational aggression predict early high school bully and bully/victim status. Aggressive Behavior, 44 (5), 501–511.

Salmivalli, C. (2010). Bullying and the peer group: A review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15 (2), 112–120.

Smith, J. A., & Judd, J. (2020). COVID-19: Vulnerability and the power of privilege in a pandemic. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 31 (2), 158–160.

Shakoor, S., Jaffee, S. R., Bowes, L., Ouellet‐Morin, I., Andreou, P., Happé, F., & Arseneault, L. (2012). A prospective longitudinal study of children’s theory of mind and adolescent involvement in bullying. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 53 (3), 254–261.

Smith, P. K., Kwak, K., & Toda, Y. (Eds.). (2016). School bullying in different cultures . Cambridge University Press.

Spadafora, N., Marini, Z. A., & Volk, A. A. (2020). Should I defend or should I go? An adaptive, qualitative examination of the personal costs and benefits associated with bullying intervention. Canadian Journal of School Psychology, 35 (1), 23–40.

Stellwagen, K. K., & Kerig, P. K. (2013). Ringleader bullying: Association with psychopathic narcissism and theory of mind among child psychiatric inpatients. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 44 (5), 612–620.

Sulkowski, M. L., Bauman, S. A., Dinner, S., Nixon, C., & Davis, S. (2014). An investigation into how students respond to being victimized by peer aggression. Journal of School Violence, 13 (4), 339–358.

Sutton, J., Smith, P. K., & Swettenham, J. (1999). Social cognition and bullying: Social inadequacy or skilled manipulation? British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17 , 435–450.

Vaillancourt, T., Hymel, S., & McDougall, P. (2003). Bullying is power: Implications for school-based intervention strategies. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 19 (2), 157–176.

van den Berg, Y. H. M., Burk, W. J., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2019). The functions of aggression in gaining, maintaining, and losing popularity during adolescence: A multiple-cohort design. Developmental Psychology, 55 (10), 2159–2168.

van den Berg, Y. H. M., Lansu, T. A. M., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2020). Preference and popularity as distinct forms of status: A meta-analytic review of 20 years of research. Journal of Adolescence, 84 , 78–95.

Veenstra, R., Lindenberg, S., Munniksma, A., & Dijkstra, J. K. (2010). The complex relation between bullying, victimization, acceptance, and rejection: Giving special attention to status, affection, and sex differences. Child Development, 81 , 480–486.

Volk, A. A., Andrews, N. C., & Dane, A. V. (2022a). Balance of power and adolescent aggression. Psychology of Violence, 12 , 31–41.

Volk, A. A., Dane, A. V., & Al-Jabouri, E. (2022b). Is adolescent bullying an evolutionary adaptation? A 10-year review. Educational Psychology Review , 1–28.

Volk, A. A., Camilleri, J. A., Dane, A. V., & Marini, Z. A. (2012). Is adolescent bullying an evolutionary adaptation? Aggressive Behavior, 38 (3), 222–238.

Volk, A. A., Dane, A. V., & Marini, Z. A. (2014). What is bullying? A Theoretical Redefinition. Developmental Review, 34 (4), 327–343.

Vredenburgh, D., & Brender, Y. (1998). The hierarchical abuse of power in work organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 17 (12), 1337–1347.

Wilson, J. L. (2016). An exploration of bullying behaviours in nursing: A review of the literature. British Journal of Nursing, 25 (6), 303–306.

Wincentak, K., Connolly, J., & Card, N. (2017). Teen dating violence: A meta-analytic review of prevalence rates. Psychology of Violence, 7 (2), 224–241.

Wolke, D., Tippett, N., & Dantchev, S. (2015). Bullying in the family: Sibling bullying. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2 (10), 917–929.

Xu, T., Magnusson Hanson, L. L., Lange, T., Starkopf, L., Westerlund, H., Madsen, I. E., & Rod, N. H. (2019). Workplace bullying and workplace violence as risk factors for cardiovascular disease: A multi-cohort study. European Heart Journal , 40 (14), 1124–1134.

Ybarra, M. L., Espelage, D. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2014). Differentiating youth who are bullied from other victims of peer-aggression: The importance of differential power and repetition. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55 (2), 293–300.

Yeager, D. S., Fong, C. J., Lee, H. Y., & Espelage, D. L. (2015). Declines in efficacy of anti-bullying programs among older adolescents: Theory and a three-level meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37 , 36–51.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Child and Youth Studies, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St. Catharines, ON, L2S 3A1, Canada

Naomi C. Z. Andrews & Anthony A. Volk

Behavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, Radboud University, Houtlaan 4, Nijmegen, 6525 XZ, The Netherlands

Antonius H. N. Cillessen

Department of Psychology, Queen’s University, Humphrey Hall, 62 Arch Street, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada

Wendy Craig

Department of Psychology, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St Catharines, ON, L2S 3A1, Canada

Andrew V. Dane

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony A. Volk .

Ethics declarations

None of the authors has any competing interests to declare. This manuscript was not supported by external funding. All of the authors contributed towards the ideas, writing, and editing of this manuscript with authorship determined by alphabetical order.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Andrews, N.C.Z., Cillessen, A.H.N., Craig, W. et al. Bullying and the Abuse of Power. Int Journal of Bullying Prevention 5 , 261–270 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00170-0

Download citation

Accepted : 03 April 2023

Published : 19 April 2023

Issue Date : September 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00170-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Abuse of power
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Cornelia van Scherpenberg, Lindsey Bultema, Anja Jahn, Michaela Löffler, Vera Minneker, Jana Lasser

Manifestations of power abuse in academia and how to prevent them

11 March 2021 | doi:10.5281/zenodo.4580544 | 1 Comment

A group of researchers from the German N² network presents the results of a survey among PhD students on the abuse of power in science and outlines ways to counter it

This article results from a cooperation within  N² , a network of the  Helmholtz Juniors ,  Leibniz PhD Network  and  Max Planck PhDnet . The International PhD Program Mainz (IPP) is an associated member of N². Representing more than 16.000 doctoral researchers, it is the biggest network of doctoral researchers in Germany. The N² member networks regularly conduct surveys and, individually or in the framework of N², represent issues concerning the doctoral researchers of their networks towards the respective research organizations as well as to the public.

In recent years, evidence of cases of power abuse in academia have been made public in various news reports about poor leadership, bullying and even sexual harassment of employees by superiors at universities (Boytchev, 2020; Hartocollis, 2018; Schenkel, 2018) and non-university research organisations in Germany and abroad (Devlin & Marsh, 2018; Weber, 2018). In addition, surveys amongst employees (especially doctoral researchers) at these institutions has revealed alarming numbers of instances of (witnessing) bullying (In German reports of abusive behaviour at the workplace, the word „mobbing“ is often used for „bullying“), discrimination or sexual harassment by a superior (e.g., Arcudi et al., 2019; Beadle et al., 2020; Olsthoorn et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2020; Regler et al., 2019; Schraudner et al., 2019).

These numbers and reports suggest that the basis for these incidents is inherent in the structures of the academic system. The academic system, not only in Germany, is set up very hierarchically – people with an established career (e.g., a professor, a research group leader, or a director of a research institute) sit at the top, while early career researchers, continuing their education and advancing their career, are at the lower end of the hierarchy.

In this article we outline the manifestations of power hierarchy and dependencies in the academic system from the point of view of doctoral researchers (DRs) – based on findings from surveys on the situation of DRs at non-university research organisations in Germany, as well as on our own experiences as DRs and elected representatives of the DRs in the Helmholtz Association, Leibniz Association, Max Planck Society and IPP Mainz, respectively. Moreover, we give recommendations on how to navigate and prevent instances of power abuse and summarize which measures have already been taken by research institutions such as those with which N² member networks are affiliated (A detailed report on our results and observations can also be found in the contribution to the 2020 conference “Absender unbekannt. Anonyme Anschuldigungen in der Wissenschaft“ (Lasser et al., accepted)).

DATA COLLECTION ON SUPERVISION AND INSTANCES OF POWER ABUSE IN THE 2019 N² HARMONIZED SURVEY

In 2019, the N² members conducted harmonized surveys in their networks. The individual survey reports (Beadle et al., 2020; Olsthoorn et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2020) shed light on the relationship between supervision, working conditions, mental health and experiences of abusive behaviour. Supplemented by reports from other large national (Briedis et al., 2018; Schraudner et al., 2019) and international surveys (Wellcome Trust, 2020; Woolston, 2019), they serve as evidence for the status quo of the prevalence of power abuse in (German) academia, which we outline below.

Prevalence of conflict cases amongst early career researchers According to our surveys 10-13% of DRs report to have been subjected to bullying by a superior at least once (Figure 1A). Only one third of those who have experienced bullying reported the incident to an official body (Figure 1B) and out of those, only about a quarter are satisfied with how the matter was resolved (Figure 1C). In other surveys (e.g., Schraudner et al., 2019), the respondents’ two most important reasons for not reporting an incident are their concerns that there would be no consequences for the perpetrator and the fear that their career would be impeded. Indeed, significant numbers reported general negative consequences or specific negative consequences for their career after they made a report.

Figure 1: Experiences with bullying and conflict reporting. A: Participants were asked “While working at your institute/center, have you at any point been subjected to bullying by a superior?”. The graph shows the fraction over all respondents who have at least once experienced bullying by a superior. B: Participants were asked “Did you ever report a conflict with a superior?”. The graph shows the fraction over all respondents who answered “yes”. C: For those who answered yes in (B), participants were asked “Please indicate the level of satisfaction with the consequences of your report?”. The answers were given on a scale from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” and are grouped here (dissatisfied = very dissatisfied + dissatisfied, neither nor, satisfied = very satisfied + satisfied). Numbers compiled from the individual survey reports by the respective networks that are part of N2 (Beadle et al., 2020; Olsthoorn et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2020). Graphic created by Theresa Kuhl, Helmholtz Zentrum München – German Research Centre for Environmental Health.

Amongst the DRs represented by N², about a quarter of DRs are dissatisfied with their supervision (Figure 2A) and about a third consider giving up their PhD “often” or “occasionally”, a tendency that correlates with experiences of bullying (Figure 2B, see also Briedis et al, 2018). These findings universally show that DRs perceive the strong and multiple dependencies between them and their supervisors as problematic, leading to dissatisfaction, mental health problems (For a detailed report on the mental health crisis among doctoral researchers see our previous post on this blog) and thoughts about quitting.

Figure 2: Satisfaction with supervision and aspects of academia. A: Participants were asked “How satisfied are you with your PhD supervision in general?”. The answers were given on a scale from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied” and are grouped here (dissatisfied = very dissatisfied + dissatisfied + rather dissatisfied, satisfied = very satisfied + satisfied + rather dissatisfied). Numbers compiled from the individual survey reports by the respective networks that are part of N2 (Beadle et al., 2020; Olsthoorn et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2020). Graphic created by Theresa Kuhl, Helmholtz Zentrum München – German Research Centre for Environmental Health.

Multiple dependencies in academia 

Why do conflicts between supervisors and DRs occur and how do they manifest?  Due to the academic hierarchy, power differentials between DRs and their superiors exist in different, often interconnected areas of academic life. In the majority of cases, the employer and scientific supervisor are the same person, who therefore has administrative power over future employment and contract extensions as well as over evaluation of scientific results. These professors, institute directors, research group leaders, or principal investigators (PIs) and their relationship to the DR have a direct impact on the DR’s academic reputation and future successful navigation through the academic system (e.g., as co-authors on publications and grant applications, through grading of theses, or through recommendation letters). These various dependencies on the superior put the DR in a vulnerable position. They have a lot to lose and may therefore be unable or unwilling to defend themselves in cases of conflict. A closer look at these characteristics of power differentials reveals their potential as sources of conflicts and abusive behavior – but also the opportunity to alleviate them through measures and systematic changes.

Power through scientific evaluation Traditionally, in German universities and research institutions, the main supervisor of a dissertation is also the main evaluator of the project. This means that they have to assess the quality of a thesis which results from work they supervised themselves. This conflation between supervision and assessment often results in a conflict of interest that can take many forms.

On the one hand, there are no incentives for superiors to truthfully evaluate the work they have supervised (sometimes on a daily basis): Senior researchers (such as PIs or professors) are often assessed on the number of DRs they graduate – an incentive to let people pass with low grades rather than failing them due to substandard work.

On the other hand and more commonly, supervisors can use the threat of a bad thesis evaluation to compel work from the DRs beyond what has been contractually agreed upon – for example when it comes to scientific publications. The duration required to publish in an academic journal varies greatly, depending on the journal and field. Although the researcher can assess the average time it takes from submission to acceptance for a specific journal, once the article is submitted, they no longer have control over how quickly the submission progresses through the peer review system (Huisman & Smits, 2017). In turn, this can delay the thesis completion by many months.

Figure 3: Employment situation and working hours of DRs in the N2 member organizations. Numbers compiled from the individual survey reports by the respective networks that are part of N2 (Beadle et al., 2020; Olsthoorn et al., 2020; Peukert et al., 2020). Graphic created by Theresa Kuhl, Helmholtz Zentrum München – German Research Centre for Environmental Health.

Power over type and length of employment Researchers usually have a high intrinsic motivation to work extensively on their research, and this is exacerbated by the high pressure and competitive environment in academia (Woolston, 2019). However, pressure from supervisors is given as a main reason for long average working hours (see Figure 3A), work on weekends and a tendency not to take vacation time in academia. This pressure is intensified by the precarious employment situation of the majority of DRs.

Employment contracts for DRs are almost always time-limited: 98% of DRs working at universities or non-university research institutions have fixed-term contracts (BUWIN, 2021, p. 111); for postdocs or scientists without tenure under the age of 45 this number still ranges between 84-96% (BUWIN, 2021, p.112). Data reveals that a PhD in Germany takes between 3.5 and 7.1 years, depending on the subject (BUWIN, 2021, p. 138; Jaksztat et al., 2012; and see Figure 3B). However, our survey results show that many DRs receive a contract with a duration of less than 36 months (Figure 3C). These contract durations are not long enough to ensure the completion of a PhD within the first employment contract and make it very likely that DRs will need at least one contract extension to complete their degree. The situation is even more precarious for other early career researchers such as postdocs and junior group leaders. In 2017, half of all employment contracts were reported to be limited to less than one year (BUWIN, 2017, p.132), even though research projects regularly take substantially longer to be completed. This situation seems to have improved slightly, with average contract durations of 28 months for postdocs (BUWIN, 2021, p. 116/117).

Decisions about further employment of DRs are often taken by a single person who has power over the research unit, institute or third-party funding on which the DR is employed. This means that DRs regularly depend on them to extend their contracts. While a permanent contract cannot be easily terminated as it usually requires justification and/or involvement of the works or staff council, employees with short-term contracts can be easily let go by simply not renewing their contract. In addition to increasing the researchers’ financial vulnerability, these precarious employment conditions are especially threatening to international researchers from outside the European Union, who might lose their residence permit, which is directly tied to their working contract.

Power over reputation and knowledge transfer Particularly at the beginning of an academic career, DRs are dependent on their superiors to share their knowledge and experience of the academic sphere with them, in order to be successful in academia. For example, the PI or professor is much more knowledgeable about appropriate funding agencies, appropriate venues for publications, conferences and the scientific network.

Researchers profit significantly when their supervisors introduce them into relevant academic circles and help them move through the bottleneck of academic hierarchy in general. This puts supervisors in a unique position of power, to foster or damage the reputation of the DRs. Less than half of the DRs report that they receive the support they need from their supervisors to further their career. This can manifest itself in supervisors allowing or preventing DRs from attending conferences and criticizing their graduates in front of other senior researchers and potential future employers. The most formal shape that this power differential takes is the letter of recommendation which is required for almost all applications to future academic and non-academic positions. Supervisors have no obligation to provide such a letter and if they do, they have no obligation to substantiate a negative assessment of the DR. Moreover, in most academic fields, supervisors have the power to decide about authorship contributions in academic publications. In many cases, at least one first or corresponding author publication is required to receive a doctorate and to successfully apply for a research position or grant after completion of the PhD. The pressure to “publish or perish” leaves DRs dependent on their supervisor to grant them this (first) authorship (Wu et al., 2019).

Lastly, it is much harder for international researchers (especially on short-term contracts) to familiarize themselves with the bureaucratic structures, workplace regulations and their own employment rights.

THE VICIOUS CYCLE OF ABUSIVE BEHAVIOUR IN ACADEMIA…

As outlined above, power differentials exist in many aspects of academia and DRs depend on their supervisors for their livelihood, reputation and future career. These systemic conditions lay the ground for ubiquitous potential conflicts. However, as incidents of abusive behaviour are rarely reported, the academic system is deprived of much-needed feedback from a majority of its members, hindering improvement. At worst, DRs might pass on their own experiences of bad and abusive supervision when they become postdocs or when it is their turn to supervise and lead a research group – the vicious cycle of bad scientific leadership and dependencies. This situation is damaging for the academic system as a whole, as it rewards conformism and alienates original thinkers and creative young minds from research. This way, the competitiveness of academia is reproduced time and time again, leaving researchers little room to pursue their original goal: to advance scientific progress (see also Dirnagl, 2021).

Therefore, we propose a variety of measures that have the potential not only to resolve but prevent conflicts related to power differentials and break the vicious cycle. The recommendations are based on a  position paper  on Power Abuse and Conflict Resolution published by our network (N², 2019). We would like to stress that some recommendations we describe here are already (being) implemented in research institutions, also through fruitful exchanges between the institutions and PhD representatives or networks (see Infobox).

Conflict Resolution & Prevention of Power Abuse  Measures implemented by the Helmholtz Association (HGF), the Max Planck Society (MPG) & the Leibniz Association (WGL). Many research institutions and universities have implemented measures for prevention and resolution of conflict. In many instances, these measures were the result of a fruitful collaboration with the respective PhD networks. The following measures have been implemented in the organisations represented by N²: 

Supervision agreement and Thesis Advisory Committees

• 55-70% of DRs have a supervision agreement and/or a Thesis Advisory Committee (N² harmonized survey 2019).
• Supervision agreement composed by Leibniz PhD Network in 2020, already implemented in some WGL institutes ( link ).
• Supervision and employment guidelines on an institutional level are stated in doctoral guidelines ( HGF , MPG ,  WGL )

Leadership trainings

• MPG started seminars and coaching for directors and research group leaders within the framework of the  Planck Academy  founded in 2020.
• The HGF has introduced the  Helmholtz Leadership Academy .
• The WGL has established a lecture program on leadership ( Führungskolleg ).

Conflict reporting and resolution

• In order to deal with conflicts, institutes and centers of the HGF, MPG and WGL have local ombudspersons.
• The WGL introduced a central ombuds committee in 2020 ( link ).
• The HGF is currently establishing a central ombudsperson with the new good scientific practice guidelines.
• The MPG assigned an external law firm as an independent contact point in 2018, and in 2019 established an Internal Investigations Unit as a central reporting office that can initiate investigations.
• The WGL created the external Advice Center for Conflict Guidance and Prevention.

… AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HOW TO BREAK IT

Supervision agreements First of all, power differentials can be navigated and power abuse prevented if DRs and their supervisors sign and adhere to a supervision agreement, which clearly outlines roles, expectations and procedures from both sides. Such an agreement can go a long way in preventing a mismatch of expectations or misunderstandings right from the beginning of a project and side-stepping potential conflicts that could escalate. They also establish a level of accountability for the supervision provided, and also for the work expected from the DR.

Thesis Advisory Committees Moreover, PhD supervision should be spread out to more than one person, ideally in the form of a Thesis Advisory Committee, which includes external, independent advisors who consult on the progress of the dissertation project. This is already common practice in the UK, but also in most institutes belonging to the Max Planck Society (see infobox).

At the same time, when it comes to thesis assessment, there should be a clear division between main supervisor and main referee. At the minimum, as suggested also by the Hochschulrektorenkonferenz (HRK, 2012), external reviewers should be included in the thesis evaluation and grading process.

Leadership and communication trainings An additional measure which promises to alleviate the instances of power differentials outlined above, is to introduce leadership training for any senior researcher taking on supervision and/or leadership responsibility. This addresses the assumption that power abuse often does not happen out of spite but is rather an expression of the inability to effectively manage and lead a research group. With the latest incidents of power abuse (Boytchev, 2020; Devlin & Marsh, 2018; Hartocollis, 2018; Weber, 2018), it has become once more apparent that scientific excellence does not equal good leadership skills. Therefore, any researcher who is responsible for the supervision of DRs should take part in mandatory and regular leadership training in order to learn how best to guide the DRs and their other employees through the existing differentials in reputation, knowledge and employment status. At the same time, doctoral researchers and postdocs would benefit from training courses focusing on communication and cultural skills, empowerment for networking and career choices, and knowledge about navigating the academic system and its obstacles.

Confidential and independent conflict resolution Whenever a conflict occurs, the victim should have the opportunity to make a confidential report of the incident with the expectation of a timely investigation. Therefore, it is important that the existing reporting structures are clearly outlined by the institution and regularly communicated to its members. Conflict resolution should involve a multi-staged investigation, as appropriate to the level of escalation of the conflict. Such a process should start at local conflict resolution mechanisms (Ombudsperson, works council etc.) and include the possibility to involve investigation of the conflict case by an independent committee. All steps of the conflict resolution mechanism must be clearly documented and communicated to all parties involved. In all instances, when the victim feels it is necessary, their anonymity must be protected. The trust in these mechanisms is key to establish them as a feedback structure for researchers from all levels.

Protection through anonymity From our own experience as representatives of DRs and through studying the data from our surveys, we know that a strong motivator for DRs not to report incidents of abusive behaviour is the fear of negative consequences for their careers. Thus, the possibility to anonymously contact people responsible for conflict resolution (such as an ombudsperson or gender equality officer) allows victims of power abuse to receive support without the fear of direct repercussions from their supervisor. Importantly, the identity of the person reporting a conflict needs to remain anonymous to the offender, even after the conclusion of the investigation, to protect the reputation and career of the victim.

Recently, anonymous accusations in the academic context have been discussed critically (e.g., Buchhorn & Freisinger, 2020). We acknowledge that allegations of power abuse can have a very damaging impact on the reputation and career of senior researchers as well. However, firstly, according to a recent report by the German “Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft” (Czesnick & Rixen, in press), anonymous accusations only account for approximately 10% of all accusations. Secondly, assessing the substance of an accusation can be achieved without knowing the identity of the accuser. Lastly, anonymity extends to the potential offender as well, ensuring their opportunity to defend themselves and resolve the incident without damage to their reputation.

Overall, anonymity is an absolute necessity to alleviate the power differentials between DRs and senior researchers and encourage reporting of incidents and corrective action. Taking into account the measures which have already been implemented (see Infobox), the developments are promising. As representatives of doctoral researchers, we regularly communicate our recommendations to various stakeholders of the academic system within our organizations and beyond and highly appreciate when they are taken seriously and when PhD representatives are invited to take part in the development of appropriate measures. We recognize the importance of and the need to change the organizational culture surrounding power differentials in academia. While a system is hard to change, we believe that implementation of the measures outlined above will reduce the incidences of abusive behavior and enable the academic system to deal with conflicts that it currently cannot resolve in a satisfactory manner. Only through collaboration on all levels of the academic hierarchy can we maintain a system that provides a healthy feedback culture, offers a supportive and sustainable working environment, and fosters excellent research.

Arcudi, A., Cumurovic, A., Gotter, C., Graeber, D., Joly, P., Ott, V., Schanze, J.-L., Thater, S., Weltin, M., & Yenikent, S. (2019). Doctoral Researchers in the Leibniz Association: Final Report of the 2017 Leibniz PhD Survey .

Beadle, B., Do, S., El Youssoufi, D., Felder, D., Gorenflos López, J., Jahn, A., Pérez-Bosch Quesada, E., Rottleb, T., Rüter, F., Schanze, J.-L., Stroppe, A.-K., Thater, S., Verrière, A., & Weltin, M. (2020). Being a Doctoral Researcher in the Leibniz Association: 2019 Leibniz PhD Network Survey Report . Leibniz PhD Network. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/69403

Boytchev, H. (2020). Neue Vorwürfe von Mobbing und Willkür in der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. BuzzFeed .

Briedis, K., Lietz, A., Ruß, U., Schwabe, U., Weber, A., Birkelbach, R., & Hoffstätter, U. (2018). NACAPS 2018 .

Buchhorn, E., & Freisinger, G. M. (2020). Mission Rufmord: Mobbing gegen Führungskräfte. manager magazin .

BUWIN (2017). Bundesbericht Wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchs 2017: Statistische Daten und Forschungsbefunde zu Promovierenden und Promovierten in Deutschland. http://www.oapen.org/download/?type=document&docid=640942

BUWIN (2021). Bundesbericht Wissenschaftlicher Nachwuchs 2021: Statistische Daten und Forschungsbefunde zu Promovierenden und Promovierten in Deutschland. https://www.buwin.de/dateien/buwin-2021.pdf

Czesnick, H., & Rixen, S. (in press). Sind anonyme Hinweise auf wissenschaftliches Fehlverhalten ein Problem? Eine Einschätzung aus Sicht des “Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft.”

Devlin, H., & Marsh, S. (2018). Top cancer scientist loses £3.5m of funding after bullying claims . https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/aug/17/top-cancer-scientist-has-35m-in-grants-revoked-after-bullying-claims

Dirnagl, U. (2021). Back to the Future: Von industrieller zu inhaltlicher Forschungsbewertung [Laborjournal Online]. Einsichten Eines Wissenschaftsnarren. https://www.laborjournal.de/rubric/narr/narr/n_21_01.php

Hartocollis, A. (2018, November 15). Dartmouth Professors Are Accused of Sexual Abuse by 7 Women in Lawsuit (Published 2018). The New York Times . https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/us/dartmouth-professors-sexual-harassment.html

HRK. (2012). Empfehlung zur Qualitätssicherung in Promotionsverfahren .

Huisman, J., & Smits, J. (2017). Duration and quality of the peer review process: The author’s perspective. Scientometrics , 113 (1), 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5

Jaksztat, S., Preßler, N., & Briedis, K. (2012). Promotions- und Arbeitsbedingungen Promovierender im Vergleich . HIS: Forum Hochschule. https://www.uni-heidelberg.de/md/journal/2013/04/fh201215_promotion.pdf

Lasser, J., Bultema, L., Jahn, A., Löffler, M., Minneker, V., & van Scherpenberg, C. (submitted). Power abuse and anonymous accusation in academia from the point of view of early career researchers. In Anonyme Anschuldigungen in der Wissenschaft .

N². (2019). Power abuse and conflict resolution .

Olsthoorn, L. H. M., Heckmann, L. A., Filippi, A., Vieira, R. M., Varanasi, R. S., Lasser, J., Bäuerle, F., Zeis, P., Schulte-Sasse, R., & Group 2019/2020, M. P. P. survey. (2020). PhDnet Report 2019 . Max Planck PhDnet. https://pure.mpg.de/pubman/faces/ViewItemOverviewPage.jsp?itemId=item_3243876_4

Peukert, K., Jacobi, L., Geuer, J., Paredes Cisneros, I., Löffler, M., Lienig, T., Taylor, S., Gusic, M., Novakovic, N., Kuhl, T., Ordini, E., Runge, A., Samoylov, O., Härtel, M., Amend, A.-L., & Nagel, M. (2020). Survey report 2019 . Helmholtz Juniors. https://www.helmholtz.de/fileadmin/user_upload/06_jobs_talente/Helmholtz-Juniors/Survey_Report2019.pdf

Regler, B., Einhorn, L., Lasser, J., Vögele, M., Elizarova, S., Bäuerle, F., Wu, C., Förste, S., Shenolikar, J., & Group 2018, P. S. (2019). PhDnet Report 2018 . https://doi.org/10.17617/2.3052826

Schenkel, L. (2018). Die ETH entlässt Professorin Carollo wegen Mobbing-Vorwürfen – 7 Antworten zur ersten Kündigung in der Geschichte der Hochschule . Neue Zürcher Zeitung. https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/eth-zuerich-entlaesst-professorin-carollo-die-wichtigsten-fakten-ld.1495950

Schraudner, M., Striebing, C., & Hochfeld, K. (2019). Work culture and work atmosphere in the Max Planck Society . Fraunhofer Center for Responsible Research and Innovation. https://www.mpg.de/14284109/mpg-arbeitskultur-ergebnisbericht-englisch.pdf

Weber, C. (2018). Max-Planck-Direktorin Tania Singer verlässt Institut . Süddeutsche.de. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/max-planck-empathie-singer-1.4240504

Wellcome Trust. (2020). What Researchers Think About the Culture They Work In . Wellcome Trust. https://wellcome.org/sites/default/files/what-researchers-think-about-the-culture-they-work-in.pdf

Woolston, C. (2019). PhDs: The tortuous truth. Nature , 575 (7782), 403–406. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03459-7

Wu, C. M., Regler, B., Bäuerle, F. K., Vögele, M., Einhorn, L., Elizarova, S., Förste, S., Shenolikar, J., & Lasser, J. (2019). Perceptions of publication pressure in the Max Planck Society. Nature Human Behaviour , 3 (10), 1029–1030. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0728-x

thank you for the article

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

First we need to confirm, that you're human. seventy three + = 75

Author info

Cornelia van Scherpenberg is a doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Science where she researches the neural basis of language production processes. She is a member of the N² advisory board and was deputy spokesperson of the Max Planck PhDnet and N² board member in 2020.

Lindsey Bultema is a doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Structure and Dynamics of Matter, Hamburg. She’s focusing on in-liquid electron imaging techniques. She is the 2020 Spokesperson of the Max Planck PhDnet and current advisory board member of N².

Anja Jahn is a doctoral researcher at the Leibniz Institute for History and Culture of Eastern Europe (GWZO) in Leipzig. In research she focuses on multilingualism in the literatures of East Central Europe. She is member of the N² Advisory board and was spokesperson of the Leibniz PhD Network and N² Board member from September 2019 to October 2020.

Michaela Löffler is researching hydrogen isotope effects at the Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ in Leipzig. She was spokesperson for the doctoral representation Helmholtz Juniors and thus N² Board member in 2020.

Vera Minneker is a doctoral researcher and coordinator of the “International PhD Programme on Gene Regulation, Epigenetics and Genome Stability“ (IPP) at the Institute for Molecular Biology gGmbH Mainz. She was an elected doctoral researcher representative of the IPP and board member of N² from April 2019 to August 2020. She studies the formation of oncogenic chromosome translocations using high-throughput imaging and automated image analysis.

Jana Lasser is a PostDoc at the Complexity Science Hub Vienna and the Medical University Vienna. She works on modelling complex social systems with a focus on the connection between social & societal dynamics and mental & physical health. She is a member of the N² advisory board and was spokesperson of the Max Planck PhDnet in 2018.

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides

Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Abuse of power'

Create a spot-on reference in apa, mla, chicago, harvard, and other styles.

Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Abuse of power.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

Chapple, Larelle June. "Abuse of corporate power." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2000.

Eisenberg, Nadine Cecilia. "Child sexual abuse : making sense of the abuse of power and control." Thesis, London Metropolitan University, 1992. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.316642.

Alger, Stephanie Mary. "Inverting assumptions : domestic abuse without 'male power'?" Thesis, University of Manchester, 2016. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/theses/inverting-assumptions-domestic-abuse-without-male-power(bd685527-85b3-41a3-8c75-418c658659a3).html.

Totten, Mark Douglas. "Power for the powerless, girlfriend abuse by marginal male youth." Thesis, National Library of Canada = Bibliothèque nationale du Canada, 1997. http://www.collectionscanada.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ftp04/nq22180.pdf.

Totten, Mark Douglas Carleton University Dissertation Sociology and Anthropology. "Power for the powerless; girlfriend abuse by marginal male youth." Ottawa, 1996.

Simonetti, Débora Bertolini Ferreira. "Direito, poder e violência: a crise da legitimidade jurídica no cinema brasileiro." Universidade de São Paulo, 2014. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/2/2139/tde-13022015-133456/.

Hepburn, Alexa. "Deconstructing secondary school bullying : a postmodern analysis of power and subjectivity." Thesis, Glasgow Caledonian University, 1995. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.287516.

Presto, Sylvia. "The impact of power of attorney abuse on the elderly| A case study." Thesis, New Jersey City University, 2015. http://pqdtopen.proquest.com/#viewpdf?dispub=3730744.

Durable power of attorney has been recognized as a powerful legal document that is used to financially exploit the elderly across the United States. The existing research indicated elder financial abuse undermines the economic security of the financially exploited older adult.

Despite the findings, however, a recent review of the existing literature showed a lack of research that computed how much elder financial abuse was attributed to durable power of attorney abuse. Studies, such as the one published by the MetLife Market Institute, reported that $2.9B was stolen from the elderly nationwide in 2010. If the durable power of attorney is used to financially exploit the elderly, then the question becomes: How much money is stolen from the elderly by the misuse of a durable power of attorney? The existing research that quantified elder financial abuse did not delineate and show how much was attributed to durable power of attorney abuse. That is the missing link.

Adult Protective Services is a nationwide government agency that receives and investigates reports of suspected elder abuse, physical and financial. The elder financial abuse cases include those in which a durable power of attorney was used to gain access to the older adults’ money.

This dissertation was the first attempt to calculate in dollars how much money was taken from older persons in Bergen County, New Jersey through the misuse of a durable power of attorney, with a sole focus on durable power of attorney abuse apart from the other ways in which senior citizens are financially exploited. This researcher examined an open-source document prepared by Bergen County Adult Protective Services and estimated in dollars how much money was taken from the elderly in Bergen County, New Jersey over a specific period of time.

This researcher examined civil security, the human security paradigm, and national security. The focus was on the economic component of the human security paradigm and through a narrow lens, the study results demonstrated that durable power of attorney abuse is a critical threat to the economic security of the nation’s older population and poses a potential threat to our nation’s security.

The most significant result was that the data compiled in this study seemed to indicate that between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013, the majority of the elder financial abuse cases reported to and investigated by Bergen County Adult Protective Services were committed by a means other than the misuse of a durable power of attorney. When it was used, however, it resulted in the older persons having their monthly social security income stolen on a regular basis, or in other cases hundreds of thousands of dollars were taken over time.

Corbett, Alan. "Becoming the author: issues of consent, power and agency in the forensic assessment of people with intellectual disabilities." Thesis, University of Kent, 2012. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.594399.

Scott, M. "Partnership, power and policy : a case study of the Scottish Partnership on Domestic Abuse." Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2006. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.661682.

Bseiso, Layla. "Harold Pinter: A Night Out : A Study in the Political ConnotationsAnd the Abuse of Power." Thesis, Högskolan Dalarna, Engelska, 2006. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:du-2866.

Chagoya, Charleena Sharon. "SUBSTANCE ABUSE CYCLE INTERVENTION AND PREVENTION FOR CHILDREN OF SUBSTANCE ABUSERS." CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2016. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/310.

Josolyn, Simon. "Men's experiences of violence and abuse from a female intimate partner : power masculinity and institutional systems." Thesis, University of East London, 2011. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.542307.

Radford, Joyce L. "Children's social power in their relationships with adults, implications for child sexual abuse primary prevention programs." Thesis, National Library of Canada = Bibliothèque nationale du Canada, 1996. http://www.collectionscanada.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ftp04/NQ28165.pdf.

Thorn, Sophie Alexandra. "“The Abuse of Power and Indiscretion": Identity, Mourning and Control in the Work of Sophie Calle." Thesis, University of Canterbury. School of Humanities, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10092/4831.

Lindani, Sibusiso Lordwell. "An abuse of power by certain senior ministers in the congregations a challenge to pastoral care /." Diss., Pretoria ; [S.n.], 2008. http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-01082009-145023/.

Staskiewicz, Jessica A. "The constraining influence of norms on the use and misuse of power /." [St. Lucia, Qld.], 2006. http://www.library.uq.edu.au/pdfserve.php?image=thesisabs/absthe19735.pdf.

Wahyuningrum, Barry Coeli. "The politics of trafficking in Indonesia : gender, national rhetorics and power /." Abstract, 2007. http://mulinet3.li.mahidol.ac.th/thesis/2550/cd411/4937976.pdf.

Stadler, Denise de Fátima. "Assédio moral: uma analise da teoria do abuso de direito aplicada ao poder do empregador." UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DE PONTA GROSSA, 2007. http://tede2.uepg.br/jspui/handle/prefix/328.

Pimentel-Aguilar, Silvia. "Imagination, power and resilience in psychotherapists/counsellors who have overcome childhood abuse : a quantitative and qualitative study." Thesis, University of Sheffield, 2008. http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/3632/.

Corrêa, Mariana Villela. "Abuso de posição dominante: condutas de exclusão em relações de distribuição." Universidade de São Paulo, 2012. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/2/2132/tde-10042013-131710/.

Nathan, Aleah Leann. "The Power of Love: Attachment Style in the Battered Woman Syndrome." NSUWorks, 2011. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cps_stuetd/56.

Johansson, Susanne. "Sexual Relationships between Athletes and Coaches : Love, Sexual Consent, and Abuse." Doctoral thesis, Gymnastik- och idrottshögskolan, GIH, Institutionen för idrotts- och hälsovetenskap, 2017. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:gih:diva-4890.

Kortmann, Constantijn Nicolaas Johannes. "Onrechtmatige overheidsbesluiten /." Deventer : Kluwer, 2006. http://www.gbv.de/dms/spk/sbb/recht/toc/524850941.pdf.

Daka, Fridah Malindima. "Are the current Zambian constitutional provisions sufficient in preventing abuse of power by the executive organ of government?" Master's thesis, University of Cape Town, 2015. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15210.

Bell, Margaret Rose. "Social policing or social welfare? : a study of justice, power and partnership within the initial child protection conference." Thesis, University of York, 1997. http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/2510/.

Parley, Fiona Forbes. "Vulnerability and abuse : an exploration of views of care staff working with people who have learning disabilities." Thesis, Robert Gordon University, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/10059/225.

Brüggemann, A. Jelmer, and Katarina Swahnberg. "What contributes to abuse in health care? A grounded theory of female patients’ stories." Linköpings universitet, Genus och medicin, 2013. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-90196.

Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council|2009-2380|

Dowling, Peter, and res cand@acu edu au. "How Is Power Used In The Catholic Church? A case study of a group of male religious in the Archdiocese of Melbourne." Australian Catholic University. School of Social Science, 2002. http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/digitaltheses/public/adt-acuvp15.25072005.

Rosa, Fabiane Ramos. "O abuso de poder nas relações de trabalho no contexto da administração pública brasileira: um estudo de casos múltiplos." Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, 2016. https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19164.

Silva, Alberto Luis Camelier da. "Desenho industrial: abuso de direito e o reflexo na concorrência do mercado de reposição." Universidade de São Paulo, 2012. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/2/2132/tde-02042013-111046/.

Murphy, Clare. "Men's intimate partner abuse and control : reconciling paradoxical masculinities and social contradictions." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2009. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/31854/1/Clare_Murphy_Thesis.pdf.

Ahuama-Jonas, Chizara U. "Strength in the Midst of Pain: Relationship Power, Victimization, and HIV Risk Behaviors among Substance Abusing African American Women." University of Cincinnati / OhioLINK, 2014. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ucin1399623942.

Erlingsson, Christen. "Elder abuse explored through a prism of perceptions : perspectives of potential witnesses /." Doctoral thesis, Umeå University, 2007. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-1392.

The overall aim of this thesis was to deepen understanding of elder abuse (EA) by exploring and comparing perceptions held by experts, older persons, representatives of potential support organizations, and family members. Experts’ perspectives (I) were examined through risk indicators and screening questions (a) located in EA literature and (b) selected by an international Delphi panel. Risk indicators most commonly found in the literature or selected by the panel were compiled into consensus lists. There were differences between risk indicators and questions in the two lists. In papers II and III participants were interviewed in focus groups about their perceptions of EA. Older persons (II) considered EA to be due to changing society and family systems where children are not brought up to respect older persons. EA was mainly conceptualized as ageism, criminal actions, mistreatment in residential care, and societal abuse. The abuser was perceived as a stranger or a healthcare worker. Fear was discussed as a major consequence of EA; especially fear among women. Abused persons were described as carrying the responsibility to seek help. Witnesses were described as hesitant to get involved. Improvements in society such as educating children and healthcare workers were considered ways to cope with EA. Besides family and friends there were few spontaneous suggestions for where to seek help and support in society. These suggestions included healthcare, police, church, and volunteer organizations. Representatives of these suggested organizations were interviewed in focus groups about their perceptions of EA (III). Perceptions of both causes and conceptions of EA were very similar to perceptions of older persons (II). Four themes emerged in the data; good intentions in abusive situations, older generation’s responsibility for EA, failing to report abuse, and prevention of abuse. Participants (III) also expressed ageist attitudes themselves and findings included victim blaming and tolerance for EA. Participants perceived that anyone could be provoked to abuse, and that abusers can be considered victims in abusive situations. Confidentiality was discussed as a barrier to reporting and the need for educating children to show respect for older persons was identified. Interviews with an adult family member (IV) explored her experiences of witnessing abuse situations between her uncle and his wife. In her desire to protect and remain loyal to her family she felt powerless and tolerated abuse. She longed for support she could trust but was locked into passivity by her feelings of shame. Synthesis of findings (I – IV) revealed issues of isolation, autonomy, vulnerability, victim blaming, perceiving the abuser as a victim of circumstances, ageism, tolerating EA, shame, and power as essential elements in EA. Based on the findings, alternative descriptions of EA are offered as a challenge to existing EA definitions. Findings suggest that a key to unlocking EA is compassion, understood as the ability to see a situation as if we were in it ourselves, experiencing the potential for disrespect, shame and unworthiness inherent in abusive acts.

Malherbe, Helena Dorathea. "Emotional abuse in close relationships analysis of women's experiences as expressed in a therapeutic setting /." Thesis, Pretoria : [s.n.], 2005. http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/available/etd-11032006-131428.

Teodoro, Frediano José Momesso. "A tutela penal da representatividade democrática: a criminalização do financiamento ilícito de partidos políticos." Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, 2017. https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/19910.

Figueiredo, Debora de Carvalho. "The use and abuse of your sexual power : cosmopolitan / nova and the creation / maintenance of a conservative view of female sexuality." reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFSC, 1995. http://repositorio.ufsc.br/xmlui/handle/123456789/76301.

Human-van, der Westhuizen Alecia. "Teachers' experiences of power relations as psychological violence / Alecia Human-van der Westhuizen." Thesis, North-West University, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/10394/8704.

Beijar, Jessica. ""Jag blir den du säger att jag är" : Intagnas upplevelser kring bemötande och maktutövning på kriminalvårdsanstalt." Thesis, Umeå universitet, Institutionen för kultur- och medievetenskaper, 2013. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-79772.

Christensen, Katherine Batenga. "Domestic Violence, A study of men's violence in close relationship." Thesis, Malmö universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa och samhälle (HS), 2018. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-25973.

Bardes, Mary. "Aspects of goals and rewards systems as antecedents of abusive supervision the mediating effect of hindrance stress /." Orlando, Fla. : University of Central Florida, 2009. http://purl.fcla.edu/fcla/etd/CFE0002569.

De, Bruin Louise. "The silent weapon in war and peace : the power of patriarchy." Diss., University of Pretoria, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/2263/37375.

Kim, Chunhyo. "A Family Affair: The Political Economy of Media Ownership in the Republic of Korea (1998-2012)." OpenSIUC, 2014. https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/dissertations/831.

Conway, Carol Elizabeth. "Direito econômico sancionador: coordenação das esferas administrativa e penal em matéria de abuso de poder econômico." Universidade de São Paulo, 2014. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/2/2133/tde-11022015-083027/.

Söderberg, Åke, and Malin Tilly. "COMMON EXPERIENCES – MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING? A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY TO EXPLORE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF COMMON EXPERIENCES REGARDING DRUG ABUSE BETWEEN CLIENTS AND DRUG THERAPISTS DURING DRUG ADDICTION TREATMENT." Thesis, Malmö högskola, Fakulteten för hälsa och samhälle (HS), 2010. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-26573.

Svensson, Emma, and Thörner Nora. "MYNDIGHETSPERSON OCH MEDMÄNNISKA." Thesis, Malmö universitet, Fakulteten för hälsa och samhälle (HS), 2019. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-24578.

Oetama-Paul, Angela J. "When Organizations Can't Handle Survivors' Truths: Whistleblowing When Trauma is Involved." Case Western Reserve University School of Graduate Studies / OhioLINK, 2021. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=case1625676794240289.

Qtaifan, Mohammad A. S. "The requirements for access to judicial review and the grounds for challenging the abuse of discretionary power : a comparative study of English and Jordanian law." Thesis, University of Essex, 2001. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.343262.

Valiengo, Thaméa Danelon. "A tipificação dos crimes financeiros como forma de limitação do abuso do poder econômico." Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, 2007. http://tede.mackenzie.br/jspui/handle/tede/1101.

Habtemichael, Faniel Sahle. "Anti-corruption strategies in the South African public sector : perspectives on the contributions of complexity thinking and ICTs." Thesis, Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch, 2009. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/1397.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Use and abuse of power

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society Essay

Introduction, why do people abuse their power, how does authority affect people around, works cited.

Power is a national or political expression of authority. By nature, it aims to establish positive societal regulations yet can cause negative outcomes in combination with abuse. As a rule, power exists in every layer of the social organization from the classroom environment to political parties. Power abuse is the use of official power in personal interests resulted in a violation of legally protected interests of citizens, organizations, or society. Although people understand that the authorities often abuse their power, the first is likely to follow the orders of the latter.

According to Dubois, “power lowers inhibitions and produces a higher-than-average self-focus” (par. 5). Several studies confirmed the effects of power on the psychology of the individual. Feeling their power, people begin to think, experience, and even act not as those who consider themselves powerless. There are different cases in which a person tends to abuse his or her power including a large income, high positions, belonging to the privileged class, or just a wider choice in certain situations. Such people are more likely to lie and be rude. For example, the drivers of luxury cars rarely stop for pedestrians, and the members of the upper-income classes often lie and cheat during the negotiations for the sake of winning.

Leveillee states that “human individuality is often subverted by the blind obedience humans feel towards those in a position of power” (par. 1). Obedience is a fundamental basis of society. Let us consider the effects of authority power abuse on the example of an ambitious experiment initiated by Professor Philip Zimbardo on August 14, 1971, when several young men had to try on the role of guards and prisoners in jail that was artificially recreated at the Stanford University (Zimbardo 8).

The experiment is a psychological study of human responses to freedom restriction in conditions of prison life and the impact of the imposed social role on behavior. Initially, guards and prisoners had no difference from each other and were characterized as normal people. Experimenters observed their behavior, cognitive and emotional reactions, and the emerging system of relationships.

The experiment quickly got out of control. The guards behaved aggressively and mocked at prisoners, and, by the end, the latter showed rigorous emotional disturbance. If the first day went in a quiet atmosphere, the second day brought a rebellion. The guards voluntarily worked overtime and suppressed the rebellion without guidance from researchers, attacking prisoners with fire extinguishers. After this incident, the guards tried to divide prisoners and set them against each other distinguishing good and bad ones. These measures had a significant effect, and further large-scale disturbances occurred. The prison became dirty and gloomy. The right to wash was a privilege that could easily be denied. The guards forced some of “bad” prisoners to clean toilets, a tactic that is similar to that used in the United States prisons.

This experiment clearly shows power abuse occurred in ordinary people after they were given corresponding power. It proves the fact that it is important to understand the necessity to control power avoiding improper attitudes towards others. At that, the system of power is necessary for any society. Only a person living in isolation does not need to respond by obedience or disobedience to the authority of others. Obedience as a determinant of behavior is especially important in the modern world.

It is a mechanism of psychological coercion of the individual to act in a certain direction under specific circumstances. The tendency of people to obey the authority of the government connects them with the power system. The facts of history, as well as observations of everyday life, suggest that the subordination can be completely natural and even predominant attribute of ethical, moral, and appropriate behavior.

The experimental results demonstrate the sensitivity and obedience of people when there is a justifying ideology, supported by society and the state. Moreover, the results showed that the need for obedience to authority is rooted in people’s consciousness so deeply that the prisoners continued to follow the instructions despite the anguish and strong internal conflict. The Stanford experiment demonstrates that the authorities can have a strong influence on people and even control their behavior, causing them to commit inhumane acts and violence against others. This study shows the willingness and readiness of average adults to following the instructions of the authority.

In conclusion, it should be emphasized that the authorities having power over others can affect people negatively by abusing their power. In an attempt to investigate the nature of power and its effects, Zimbardo conducted the Stanford experiment and pointed out that obedience is inherent in people. This is the reason for the fact that the prisoners in his experiment followed all the orders of guards. In turn, the latter acted as real prison overseers and took the initiative in toughening the prisoners’ conditions. It was revealed that people having received power tend to change their way of thinking and opinion towards ethics.

Dubois, David. “The Two Big Ways Power Transforms a Person.” Harvard Business Review . Harvard Business Review. 2016. Web.

Leveillee, Nicholas. “The Role of Obedience in Society.” Inquiries . Inquiries. 2011. Web.

Zimbardo, Philip G. The Lucifer Effect: How Good People Turn Evil . London: Rider, 2011. Print.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, August 22). Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-authority-abuse-in-politics-and-society/

"Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society." IvyPanda , 22 Aug. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/power-authority-abuse-in-politics-and-society/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society'. 22 August.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society." August 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-authority-abuse-in-politics-and-society/.

1. IvyPanda . "Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society." August 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-authority-abuse-in-politics-and-society/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Power, Authority, Abuse in Politics and Society." August 22, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-authority-abuse-in-politics-and-society/.

• The Stanford Prison Experiment by Philip Zimbardo
• "Lucifer Effect" by Philip Zimbardo: Abuse of Power
• Stanford Prison Experiment by Philip Zimbardo: Legal Research
• Experiment on Obedience: Milligram's and Zimbardo's Study
• The Abu Ghraib Case in Zimbardo's The Lucifer Effect
• "The Lucifer Effect" by Philip Zimbardo
• The Personality Concept in Zimbardo's The Lucifer Effect
• Opinion and Clarification of the Stanford Prison Experiment
• System & Situation in “The Lucifer Effect” by Zimbardo
• The Book "The Lucifer Effect" by Philip Zimbardo
• Youth Leadership Development
• Youth Activities in Kuwait
• Karl Marx: Critique of Capitalism
• Rogue States as Subjective and Objective Concept
• Democratic Consolidation in Asia

• Starting a Business

Our Top Picks

• Best Small Business Loans
• Best Business Internet Service
• Best Online Payroll Service
• Best Business Phone Systems

Our In-Depth Reviews

• OnPay Payroll Review
• ADP Payroll Review
• Ooma Office Review
• RingCentral Review

Explore More

• Business Solutions
• Entrepreneurship
• Franchising
• Best Accounting Software
• Best Merchant Services Providers
• Best Credit Card Processors
• Best Mobile Credit Card Processors
• Clover Review
• Merchant One Review
• QuickBooks Online Review
• Xero Accounting Review
• Financial Solutions

Human Resources

• Best Human Resources Outsourcing Services
• Best Time and Attendance Software
• Best PEO Services
• Best Business Employee Retirement Plans
• Bambee Review
• Rippling HR Software Review
• TriNet Review
• Gusto Payroll Review
• HR Solutions

Marketing and Sales

• Best Text Message Marketing Services
• Best CRM Software
• Best Email Marketing Services
• Best Website Builders
• Textedly Review
• Salesforce Review
• EZ Texting Review
• Textline Review
• Business Intelligence
• Marketing Solutions
• Marketing Strategy
• Public Relations
• Social Media
• Best GPS Fleet Management Software
• Best POS Systems
• Best Employee Monitoring Software
• Best Document Management Software
• Verizon Connect Fleet GPS Review
• Zoom Review
• Samsara Review
• Zoho CRM Review
• Technology Solutions

Business Basics

• 4 Simple Steps to Valuing Your Small Business
• How to Write a Business Growth Plan
• 12 Business Skills You Need to Master
• How to Start a One-Person Business
• FreshBooks vs. QuickBooks Comparison
• Salesforce CRM vs. Zoho CRM
• RingCentral vs. Zoom Comparison
• 10 Ways to Generate More Sales Leads

Why Does Power Abuse Persist?

Table of contents.

Workplace bullying is all too common, and it leaves a negative impact on both the victim as well as the company’s culture. Power abuse fosters an environment of toxicity , and may decrease employee morale. Here’s a look at the psychology behind power abuse – and why it persists.

What is abuse of power?

Power abuse is an issue that most of us have experienced at some time, whether we acknowledge it publicly or not. Controversy and debate around this subject are constantly gaining ground and interest, especially in the workplace.

Abuse of power in the workplace may entail harassment and discrimination, which could place your business in hot water legally. Check out the business legal terms you need to know so your company is prepared.

Abusive people gain and maintain power over their victim with controlling or coercive behavior, and proceed to subject that person to psychological, physical, sexual or financial abuse. As we have seen from the media coverage of high-profile cases, this abuse can go on for years, is often ignored, and may be encouraged by those surrounding the abuser. Not taking action to stop the abuse is a form of abuse itself.

Understanding the psychology behind an abuser’s actions can help explain – but not excuse – why the abuse may continue and possibly increase.

Individuals who are abusive or have narcissistic tendencies may have a narcissistic personality disorder, or NPD. Research from the Cleveland Clinic shows that 5% of the population has NPD. Narcissists have a need to make themselves look impressive, crave admiration and power, lack empathy, and often act arrogantly. When narcissistic behavior exists, you can see an increase in power abuse cases.

In the workplace, people may abuse their power in a number of ways: by choosing to hire (or not hire) based on bias or prejudice; by creating an uncomfortable working environment; and by misusing their power in disciplinary situations. Acts of narcissism and abuse of power can create deeply dangerous and uncomfortable working conditions for employees.

An example of abuse of power includes choosing to hire or not hire based on a bias or prejudice.

Why does abuse of power persist?

Victims of abuse are often stressed and confused about their situation. This confusion can block the person’s confidence to report the issue, or they ignore it, thinking it will go away in time. It doesn’t.

Often the channel to address the issue leads to the legal department, but law firms can be a breeding ground for bully protection. Those with money or positions of power often have greater access to lawyers. They can quickly exhaust the victim’s ability to afford legal support, and they know it. The power abusers are often in a position to control the legal outcomes.

As a result, these cases often go unreported, undetected and unchallenged, because the victim feels that the threat of action could be worse than the original form of abuse. This creates a vicious cycle in which the perpetrators feel that getting away with the crime empowers them to continue their abusive behavior.

Silent supporters and ‘group shun’

 Abusers like to have support for their cause. Their social skills and positions of power can compound the issues by enrolling others in “group shun.” The group – made up of the abuser and those who are weak enough to fear that if they don’t join in, they will be the next victims – acts as a pack to ostracize an individual. Bullies often seek to remain hidden behind a veil of secrecy and cowardice. They influence others to join in so that if they are detected, they can avoid blame by deflecting their behavior onto others in the group.

This issue is rarely addressed in bullying training programs in any depth. Often the individuals involved are not entirely sure what is going on. Group shun can creep over time, and because of its stealth nature, it can be hard to describe to others so that they can recognize it. The targeted individual may become paranoid or delusional, leading to a double whammy of victimization where they feel everyone else has deserted them. When you see colleagues being shunned and ostracized by peers and organizational leaders, do not enable the abuser with your silence or tacit support. The silent witness is as guilty as the perpetrators, allowing the psychological torture to continue. The enablers are perpetrators by acting as accomplices. Cowardice and lack of courage remain the motivation for this inaction. Remember, if the vicious cycle is not stopped, you may become the next victim.

How does abuse of power happen in the workplace?

In a working environment, the abuse of power against staff can manifest in various harmful ways. Abuse usually stems from an individual who holds power (i.e., a boss, executive or manager). These individuals can apply pressure and bully or coerce their employees into difficult or stressful situations . Those who have been with the company for a short period, have an associate-level title, or are from a marginalized background can experience further acts of harassment and discomfort from their superiors. Those who abuse their power may surround themselves with other individuals of power or people prone to agreeing with them, lowering the chance for helpful feedback and behavior callouts.

Power-based harassment can include: threatening an employee by telling them they could lose their job, shifting blame, putting their own interests before the betterment of the staff and company, and other acts of harm. When a person with workplace privileges misuses their power, they can humiliate, threaten or mock staff members. These types of abusive acts of power can further cause work-based trauma.

Staff experiencing abuse of power may be stressed, put under immense pressure, and feel increased distrust toward their job or work colleagues. Overall, abuse of power can lower employee morale, increase employee turnover, and decrease productivity. When companies do not put their employees’ well-being and mental health first, it not only detrimentally hurts staff but also the company as a whole. To avoid employee burnout and mental health trauma, consider how people with power in a workplace can best advocate for those who may be experiencing power abuse.

Prioritize your employees’ mental health and well-being by listening to their feedback – especially those who may be experiencing a supervisor’s abuse of power.

How can you stop abuse of power in the workplace?

Stopping power abuse and bullying in the workplace means implementing education and enacting support systems at an organizational level. Simply having a policy in place doesn’t always help – where policies do exist, they are often ignored or ineffective. 

Consider the following tools to stop the abuse of power in the workplace:

• Intervention levels. Have operations systems that allow space for employees to discuss grievances or abuses with executive staff or HR.
• Code of conduct. Develop manuals and handbooks alongside an HR team to best protect the rights, boundaries and health of employees.
• Disciplinary measures. When preventative solutions are no longer protecting employees, have steps in place to stop and confront workplace abuses.
• Support systems. Create spaces where employees are able to safely share their experiences. This can be in the form of affinity groups, human resources, staff surveys and more.

Stop bullying and abuse of power at an organizational level by holding training, performing interventions and enacting disciplinary measures.

When regulation fails, we need to revert to character, and herein lies the ethical challenge. Character is borne out of moral virtue, courage and honor. In this case, we need to ensure we are building employees of character – those who have the courage to stand up for others, and themselves, and courage from organizations to reward those who do.

The culture of an organization must have systems in place to encourage employees to be aware of behaviors or influences that may not be acceptable, as well as speak up about those behaviors. Organizational leaders, regulators and business schools need to step up, enforce policies, be aware, and understand the implications and risks of what is going on in their own organizations and the liabilities that they face. Individuals need to show courage not to participate, to call out bad behavior, and when faced with the situation themselves, have the language to articulate what is going on clearly.

Character is an undertaught and underrepresented ethical trait in our executive education programs. It is the foundation of good leadership. Bring back character, and the need for articles like this may diminish.

Additional reporting by Sean Peek.

Get Weekly 5-Minute Business Advice

B. newsletter is your digest of bite-sized news, thought & brand leadership, and entertainment. All in one email.

Our mission is to help you take your team, your business and your career to the next level. Whether you're here for product recommendations, research or career advice, we're happy you're here!

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — The Kite Runner — Cruelty and Abuse of Power in “The Kite Runner”

Cruelty and Abuse of Power in "The Kite Runner"

• Categories: The Kite Runner

About this sample

Words: 1378 |

Published: Dec 16, 2021

Words: 1378 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1401 words

2 pages / 859 words

1 pages / 681 words

4.5 pages / 1980 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on The Kite Runner

In Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner, several major themes arise. One of the most dominant themes is the idea of redemption for past wrongdoings. The protagonist, an Afghani-American named Amir, relays the story of his [...]

In Khaled Hosseini's novel, The Kite Runner, the first chapter serves as an essential to the characters, setting, and themes that will unfold throughout the narrative. This chapter lays the groundwork for the complex [...]

Rape is a deeply troubling and pervasive issue that is often portrayed in literature as a means of exploring complex themes such as power, betrayal, and redemption. In Khaled Hosseini's novel, The Kite Runner, the character of [...]

The kite is a powerful symbol that holds significant meaning in various cultures and contexts. Throughout history, kites have been used for various purposes, from religious ceremonies to leisure activities. The symbolism of the [...]

An individual's personality is quite often determined by the actions and remarks of another person. One can become timid because another person has caused one hurt or worry. One can become brave because another person has made [...]

Notions of sins and their corresponding atonement have permeated throughout Khaled Hosseini’s incisive fiction The Kite runner as a major theme, where in the novel, the protagonist Amir’s sin towards his father Baba and his best [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Literature The Crucible

Abuse of Power and Manipulation in "The Crucible"

Table of contents, introduction, abigail's manipulation and deception, the influence of fear, the destruction of innocence, impact of power and manipulation, lessons for modern society, works cited:.

• Miller, Arthur. ""The Crucible."" Penguin Classics, 197
• Miller, A. (1953). The Crucible: A Play in Four Acts. Viking Press.
• Bigsby, C. W. E. (2005). The Crucible: A Play of Power. Literature and Theology, 19(4), 328-344.
• Bloom, H. (Ed.). (2008). Arthur Miller's The Crucible. Infobase Publishing.
• Smith, A. (2019). The Abuse of Power and Manipulation in ""The Crucible."" Literary Devices. https://literarydevices.net/the-crucible/
• Jones, M. R. (2007). Power and Manipulation in Arthur Miller's ""The Crucible."" Critical Insights: Arthur Miller, 145-162.
• Williams, L. J. (2010). Authority and Manipulation in Arthur Miller's ""The Crucible."" (Master's thesis). University of Massachusetts Amherst.
• Nichols, M. (Director). (1996). The Crucible [Film]. 20th Century Fox.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Beauty and The Beast
• The Story of An Hour
• Greek Mythology
• Anne Bradstreet
• The Lottery

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Essay on Abuse Of Power

Students are often asked to write an essay on Abuse Of Power in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Abuse Of Power

Understanding power abuse.

Power abuse means when a person who has authority uses it in the wrong way. This can be a boss, a teacher, a police officer, or even a parent. They use their position to control or harm others. This is not fair or right.

Types of Power Abuse

There are many types of power abuse. Some people use their power to scare others. Some use it to get things they want, like money or favors. And some use it to hurt people, physically or emotionally. All these are forms of power abuse.

Effects of Power Abuse

Power abuse can hurt people in many ways. It can make them feel scared, sad, or angry. It can also make them feel powerless and lose their self-confidence. In some cases, it can even lead to physical harm.

Stopping Power Abuse

Stopping power abuse is not easy, but it is possible. People need to speak up when they see it happening. And those in power need to be held accountable for their actions. This means they should face consequences if they abuse their power.

Power Abuse and Society

Power abuse is not just a problem for individuals. It can also hurt society as a whole. When those in power abuse their position, it can lead to mistrust and conflict. This can make it harder for society to function properly.

250 Words Essay on Abuse Of Power

Power abuse is when someone in a position of authority uses their power wrongly. This can be in a school, a workplace, or even in a country. It happens when the person in charge uses their power to make others do things they don’t want to do or to get what they want without thinking about the effects on others.

There are many types of power abuse. One common type is bullying, where someone uses their power to hurt or scare others. Another type is corruption, where someone uses their power to gain money or goods unfairly. Discrimination is also a type of power abuse, where people are treated badly because of their race, gender, or other factors.

Power abuse can cause a lot of harm. It can make people feel scared, sad, or angry. It can also lead to people not trusting each other or the person in power. In extreme cases, power abuse can even lead to violence or war.

Preventing Power Abuse

To stop power abuse, we need to make sure that people in power are held accountable for their actions. This means that they should be punished if they abuse their power. We also need to educate people about power abuse so they can recognize it and stand up against it.

In conclusion, power abuse is a serious problem that can cause a lot of harm. But by holding people accountable and educating others, we can help to prevent it.

500 Words Essay on Abuse Of Power

Understanding power.

Power is like a tool. When in the right hands, it can build great things. But in the wrong hands, it can cause a lot of harm. Power gives a person the ability to make decisions that affect others. A teacher, a police officer, a politician, or a boss at work all have power. They can use this power for good, like helping people, or they can misuse it.

What is Abuse of Power?

Abuse of power happens when someone uses their power in a bad way. This can mean making choices that help themselves instead of others. It can also mean using their power to hurt or control people. For example, if a boss threatens to fire an employee unless they do something they’re not comfortable with, that’s an abuse of power.

Examples of Power Abuse

Abuse of power can be seen in many places. In schools, a teacher might pick on a student because they don’t like them. In the workplace, a boss might give all the good tasks to their favorite employees. In politics, a leader might use their power to make laws that only benefit them and their friends.

When power is abused, it can hurt people and make them feel small. It can also cause fear and stress. If a teacher is always picking on a student, that student might start to hate school. If a boss is unfair, employees might feel unhappy at work. When a leader abuses power, people can lose trust in their government.

How to Stop Power Abuse

Stopping abuse of power is not easy, but there are ways to do it. One way is to make sure everyone knows what abuse of power looks like. Education is a powerful tool against abuse. Another way is to have rules that stop people from abusing their power. For example, a school could have rules against teachers picking on students. Lastly, people can stand up against power abuse. If you see someone abusing their power, you can speak up or report it.

Abuse of power is a problem that can happen anywhere. It can hurt people and make them feel scared or unhappy. But by knowing what it looks like and how to stop it, we can make our world a fairer place. Remember, power is a tool, and like any tool, it should be used with care.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Abandoned House
• Essay on Aboriginal People
• Essay on Aboriginal Health Issues

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Advertisement

Supported by

Microsoft Makes a New Push Into Smaller A.I. Systems

The company that has invested billions in generative A.I. pioneers like OpenAI says giant systems aren’t necessarily what everyone needs.

• Share full article

By Karen Weise and Cade Metz

Karen Weise covers Microsoft from Seattle. Cade Metz writes about artificial intelligence from San Francisco.

In the dizzying race to build generative A.I. systems, the tech industry’s mantra has been bigger is better, no matter the price tag.

Now tech companies are starting to embrace smaller A.I. technologies that are not as powerful but cost a lot less. And for many customers, that may be a good trade-off.

On Tuesday, Microsoft introduced three smaller A.I. models that are part of a technology family the company has named Phi-3. The company said even the smallest of the three performed almost as well as GPT-3.5, the much larger system that underpinned OpenAI’s ChatGPT chatbot when it stunned the world upon its release in late 2022.

The smallest Phi-3 model can fit on a smartphone, so it can be used even if it’s not connected to the internet. And it can run on the kinds of chips that power regular computers, rather than more expensive processors made by Nvidia.

Because the smaller models require less processing, big tech providers can charge customers less to use them. They hope that means more customers can apply A.I. in places where the bigger, more advanced models have been too expensive to use. Though Microsoft said using the new models would be “substantially cheaper” than using larger models like GPT-4, it did not offer specifics.

The smaller systems are less powerful, which means they can be less accurate or sound more awkward. But Microsoft and other tech companies are betting that customers will be willing to forgo some performance if it means they can finally afford A.I.

Customers imagine many ways to use A.I., but with the biggest systems “they’re like, ‘Oh, but you know, they can get kind of expensive,’” said Eric Boyd, a Microsoft executive. Smaller models, almost by definition, are cheaper to deploy, he said.

Mr. Boyd said some customers, like doctors or tax preparers, could justify the costs of the larger, more precise A.I. systems because their time was so valuable. But many tasks may not need the same level of accuracy. Online advertisers, for example, believe they can better target ads with A.I., but they need lower costs to be able to use the systems regularly.

“I want my doctor to get things right,” Mr. Boyd said. “Other situations, where I am summarizing online user reviews, if it’s a little bit off, it’s not the end of the world.”

Chatbots are driven by large language models , or L.L.M.s, mathematical systems that spend weeks analyzing digital books, Wikipedia articles, news articles, chat logs and other text culled from across the internet. By pinpointing patterns in all that text, they learn to generate text on their own.

But L.L.M.s store so much information, retrieving what is needed for each chat requires considerable computing power. And that is expensive.

While tech giants and start-ups like OpenAI and Anthropic have been focused on improving the largest A.I. systems, they are also competing to develop smaller models that offer lower prices. Meta and Google, for instance, have released smaller models over the past year .

Meta and Google have also “ open sourced ” these models, meaning anyone can use and modify them free of charge. This is a common way for companies to get outside help improving their software and to encourage the larger industry to use their technologies. Microsoft is open sourcing its new Phi-3 models, too.

(The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in December for copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems.)

After OpenAI released ChatGPT, Sam Altman, the company’s chief executive, said the cost of each chat was “ single-digits cents ” — an enormous expense considering what popular web services like Wikipedia are serving up for tiny fractions of a cent.

Now, researchers say their smaller models can at least approach the performance of leading chatbots like ChatGPT and Google Gemini. Essentially, the systems can still analyze large amounts of data but store the patterns they identify in a smaller package that can be served with less processing power.

Building these models are a trade-off between power and size. Sébastien Bubeck, a researcher and vice president at Microsoft , said the company built its new smaller models by refining the data that was pumped into them, working to ensure that the models learned from higher-quality text.

Part of this text was generated by the A.I. itself — what is known as “ synthetic data. ” Then human curators worked to separate the sharpest text from the rest.

Microsoft has built three different small models: Phi-3-mini, Phi-3-small and Phi-3-medium. Phi-3-mini, which will be available on Tuesday, is the smallest (and cheapest) but the least powerful. Phi-3 Medium, which is not yet available, is the most powerful but the largest and most expensive.

Making systems small enough to go directly on a phone or personal computer “will make them a lot faster and order of magnitudes less expensive,” said Gil Luria, an analyst at the investment bank D.A. Davidson.

Karen Weise writes about technology and is based in Seattle. Her coverage focuses on Amazon and Microsoft, two of the most powerful companies in America. More about Karen Weise

Cade Metz writes about artificial intelligence, driverless cars, robotics, virtual reality and other emerging areas of technology. More about Cade Metz

Explore Our Coverage of Artificial Intelligence

News  and Analysis

A new flood of child sexual abuse material created by A.I. is threatening to overwhelm the authorities  already held back by antiquated technology and laws. As a result, legislators are working on bills  to combat A.I.-generated sexually explicit images of minors.

Users of Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp and Messenger will soon be able to use newly added smart assistants , powered by Meta’s latest artificial intelligence model, to obtain information and complete tasks.

Microsoft said that it would make a $1.5 billion investment in G42 , an A.I. giant in the United Arab Emirates, in a deal largely orchestrated by the Biden administration to box out China.

The Age of A.I.

Much as ChatGPT generates poetry, a new A.I. system devises blueprints for microscopic mechanisms  that can edit your DNA.

Could A.I. change India’s elections? Avatars are addressing voters by name, in whichever of India’s many languages they speak. Experts see potential for misuse  in a country already rife with disinformation.

Which A.I. system writes the best computer code or generates the most realistic image? Right now, there’s no easy way to answer those questions, our technology columnist writes .

U.S. clinics are starting to offer patients a new service: having their mammograms read not just by a radiologist, but also by an A.I. model .

A.I. tools can replace much of Wall Street’s entry-level white-collar work , raising tough questions about the future of finance.