How power shapes judgments of culpability: Shield or liability?

{"Powerholders":[0],"can":[1,146],"be":[2,14,92,189],"the":[3,19,26,171,209,226],"object":[4],"of":[5,21,28,61,95,126,157,228],"great":[6],"respect":[7],"and":[8,16,69,81,103,133,173,207],"admiration,":[9],"but":[10],"they":[11,104,145],"may":[12,51],"also":[13],"distrusted":[15],"\\"canceled\\"":[17],"in":[18,41,108,225],"court":[20],"public":[22],"opinion.":[23],"This":[24],"raises":[25],"question":[27],"whether":[29],"power":[30,50,89,101,120,131,181,194,201,221],"is":[31,39],"an":[32,109,154,204],"asset":[33],"or":[34,56],"a":[35],"detriment":[36],"when":[37],"one":[38],"implicated":[40],"wrongdoing.":[42],"Different":[43],"theoretical":[44],"perspectives":[45],"informed":[46],"competing":[47],"hypotheses,":[48],"suggesting":[49],"either":[52],"decrease":[53],"(shielding":[54],"hypothesis)":[55,59],"increase":[57],"(liability":[58],"judgments":[60],"culpability.":[62,230],"Here,":[63],"we":[64],"report":[65],"four":[66],"main":[67],"studies":[68,72],"10":[70],"supplemental":[71],"that":[73,179],"addressed":[74],"this":[75,134],"conundrum,":[76],"using":[77],"diverse":[78,162],"transgressions,":[79],"methods,":[80],"samples.":[82],"In":[83,114],"Study":[84,115,151,197],"1,":[85],"participants":[86,117],"judged":[87],"higher":[88,119,180],"individuals":[90],"to":[91,188],"likelier":[93],"sources":[94],"deceitful":[96],"die-rolling":[97],"reports":[98],"than":[99,129,192],"lower":[100,130,193],"individuals,":[102],"trusted":[105],"them":[106],"less":[107],"incentivized":[110],"behavioral":[111],"trust":[112],"game.":[113],"2,":[116],"rated":[118],"people":[121],"as":[122,186,203],"more":[123],"probable":[124],"perpetrators":[125],"financial":[127],"fraud":[128],"people,":[132],"effect":[135],"was":[136,153,166,170],"mediated":[137],"by":[138],"perceived":[139,212],"impunity":[140],"(i.e.,":[141],"powerholders":[142],"seemingly":[143],"believing":[144],"get":[147],"away":[148],"with":[149,223],"anything).":[150],"3":[152],"archival":[155],"study":[156],"97,628":[158],"forum":[159],"posts":[160],"about":[161,168,184],"transgressions":[163],"where":[164],"there":[165],"ambiguity":[167],"who":[169],"culprit,":[172],"users":[174],"rendered":[175],"judgments.":[176],"We":[177],"found":[178],"posters":[182],"were":[183],"twice":[185],"likely":[187],"deemed":[190],"guilty":[191],"posters.":[195],"Finally,":[196],"4":[198],"excluded":[199],"generic":[200],"saliency":[202],"alternative":[205],"explanation":[206],"replicated":[208],"mediation":[210],"via":[211],"impunity.":[213],"These":[214],"findings":[215],"indicate":[216],"that,":[217],"besides":[218],"many":[219],"perks,":[220],"comes":[222],"perils":[224],"form":[227],"ascribed":[229],"(PsycInfo":[231],"Database":[232],"Record":[233],"(c)":[234],"2026":[235],"APA,":[236],"all":[237],"rights":[238],"reserved).":[239]}

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
2026-09-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000532
Primary Topic
Free Will and Agency
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

How power shapes judgments of culpability: Shield or liability?

Jordi Quoidbach, Gerben A. van Kleef, Rohan Dunham, Seval Gündemir et al.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Free Will and Agency
article

How power shapes judgments of culpability: Shield or liability?

Jordi Quoidbach, Gerben A. van Kleef, Rohan Dunham, Seval Gündemir, Astrid C. Homan
article en

Abstract

Powerholders can be the object of great respect and admiration, but they may also be distrusted and "canceled" in the court of public opinion. This raises the question of whether power is an asset or a detriment when one is implicated in wrongdoing. Different theoretical perspectives informed competing hypotheses, suggesting power may either decrease (shielding hypothesis) or increase (liability hypothesis) judgments of culpability. Here, we report four main studies and 10 supplemental studies that addressed this conundrum, using diverse transgressions, methods, and samples. In Study 1, participants judged higher power individuals to be likelier sources of deceitful die-rolling reports than lower power individuals, and they trusted them less in an incentivized behavioral trust game. In Study 2, participants rated higher power people as more probable perpetrators of financial fraud than lower power people, and this effect was mediated by perceived impunity (i.e., powerholders seemingly believing they can get away with anything). Study 3 was an archival study of 97,628 forum posts about diverse transgressions where there was ambiguity about who was the culprit, and users rendered judgments. We found that higher power posters were about twice as likely to be deemed guilty than lower power posters. Finally, Study 4 excluded generic power saliency as an alternative explanation and replicated the mediation via perceived impunity. These findings indicate that, besides many perks, power comes with perils in the form of ascribed culpability. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Universitat Ramon Llull (ES), University of Amsterdam (NL), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Free Will and Agency
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.