Power, Testosterone, and Risk-Taking

Power has been found to increase risk-taking (Anderson & Galinsky, 2006) but this effect appears to be moderated by individual differences in power motivation (Maner, Gailliot, Butz, & Peruche, 2007). Among individuals high in power motivation, the experience of power leads to more conservative decisions. As testosterone is associated with the pursuit of power and status (Dabbs & Dabbs, 2000), we reasoned that hightestosterone individuals primed with power might be similarly risk-avoidant. Conversely, we hypothesized that high-testosterone individuals primed with low power, would see risk-taking as a vehicle for pursuing potential gains to their status and resources. We report findings from two experiments that are consistent with these predictions. In Experiment 1, higher testosterone males (as indicated by second–fourth digit ratio) showed greater risk-taking when primed with low power. Experiment 2 replicated this effect and also showed that when primed with high power, higher testosterone males took fewer risks. Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. key words power; digit ratio; testosterone; risk-taking The canvas of human history is thickly layered with struggles for power, privilege, and prestige. One such struggle took place in 50BCwhen the Roman Senate, led by Pompey, attempted to subjugate Julius Caesar by accusing him of treason and ordering him to return to Rome and disband his army. In response, with a single legion of men, Caesar re-entered Rome, crossing the Rubicon River and uttering the words, ‘‘Let the die be cast!’’. Thus began a civil war that set in motion the fall of the Republic and the emergence of the Roman Empire. Why would Pompey, comfortably seated within the powerful echelons of the Roman elite, risk Caesar’s wrath with such a challenge and then flee when the challenge was met? Why would a vastly outnumbered Caesar risk his life in response to such a challenge? One possible explanation can be found in research that suggests that the experience of power can lead individuals to assume unduly optimistic appraisals of the possible consequences of their actions, and subsequently take risks they would otherwise avoid (Anderson & Galinsky, 2006). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making J. Behav. Dec. Making, (2009) Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/bdm.671 *Correspondence to: Richard Ronay, School of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. POWER AND RISK-TAKING Power refers to the capacity to influence others via the control of resources and the ability to administer rewards and punishments (Emerson, 1962; French & Raven, 1959; Anderson & Galinsky, 2006). This capacity appears to influence individuals in a number of ways that are relevant to risky decision-making. Power inspires action (Galinsky, 2003) and approach-orientations (Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003), it shifts attention away from punishments and toward rewards (Keltner et al., 2003), and it leads to optimism and subsequent risk-taking (Anderson & Galinsky, 2006). Despite the consistency of these findings, there is reason to suspect that the story might be more complicated than this. The quest for power is an ongoing tournament, with the winnings from one round subject to the outcome of the next. As a consequence, the powerful and the powerless enter each new contest from very different perspectives, with powerful individuals having much more to lose and powerless individuals having much more to gain. The fact that the balance of potential gains and losses is asymmetrically experienced by the powerful and powerless suggests that the two should be differentially disposed to risk. That is, the benefits of power should cause the powerful to avoid risks that place their privileges in jeopardy, and this effect should be stronger for those who value power more. Support for this possibility is provided by the recent demonstration that the effect of power on risk-taking is moderated by individual differences in power motivation (Maner et al., 2007). Despite prior demonstrations that power increases risk-taking on average (Anderson & Galinsky, 2006; Galinsky, 2003), Maner and colleagues found that powerful participants who were high in power-motivation (defined as a high-motivation to achieve and maintain positions of power) took fewer risks than controls. Powerful participants with relatively low-power motivation on the other hand acted in a manner consistent with Anderson and Galinsky’s (2006) findings, and took more risks. Furthermore, Maner et al. found that these results only emerged when participants perceived their power to be unstable. When the power structure was perceived as stable, both highand low-power motivated participants responded with riskier decisions. Thus, for those high in power motivation, the possibility of losing their valued status was enough to avert them from the risk-taking that they freely pursued under more stable conditions. TESTOSTERONE AND RISK-TAKING Testosterone is one of several androgenic hormones that function to biologically differentiate the sexes in utero, and at puberty contribute to the emergence of secondary sexual characteristics. Testosterone is not only instrumental in the development of sexually dimorphic physical characteristics, but also contributes to psychological differences between the sexes. Higher levels of testosterone are associated with the pursuit of status seeking, dominance, competition, and violence (for a review see Mazur & Booth, 1998). For instance, lawyers with higher levels of testosterone are more likely to work within the adversarial field of trial law (Dabbs, Alford & Fielden, 1998) and prisoners with higher levels of testosterone are more likely to have a history of violent crime, to be rated as tougher by fellow inmates, and to violate prison rules in displays of overt confrontation (Dabbs, Carr, Frady, & Riad, 1995). Aside from competition, status seeking and dominance appear to be the two traits most reliably associated with testosterone (Booth, Granger, Mazur, & Kivlighana, 2006; Dabbs & Dabbs, 2000). Indeed, testosterone is so strongly associated with the pursuit of status that when this desire is not fulfilled, physiological arousal increases and cognitive functioning declines (Josephs, Sellers, Newman, & Mehta, 2006). The fact that power motivation (measured via self reports of status seeking and dominance) has been shown to moderate the effect of power on risk-taking (Maner et al., 2007) suggests that the relationship between power and risk-taking might also be moderated by individual differences in testosterone. Maner and colleagues reasoned that when primed with power, individuals high in power motivation sought to avoid risks Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, (2009) DOI: 10.1002/bdm Journal of Behavioral Decision Making