When They Are the Victims, Powerful People More Likely to Notice Unfair Treatment

by Monica Joshi

Ever wonder why there is such a big hue and cry when rich people don't get the tax breaks they "so rightly deserve"? Or even less so when they are the ones benefiting from someone else's downfall? According to new research published by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, it seems to confirm what we have intuitively gathered: Powerful people respond quickly to unfair treatment when they are the victims, but not when they benefit or when others are victimized.

The new research made use of four experiments and discovered that the findings did not differ for men or women. It is important to note that most of the participants were white, so the results were not analyzed based on race. This is significant as it will be interesting to see, for future research, if the findings of this study differ when racially cataloged.

First, in one online experiment, 227 participants classified as the high-power group wrote about a time when they had power over someone else while the low-power group wrote about an experience when someone had power over them. Each participant was then required to play a computer game where their reaction times were measured in deciding the fairness of the distribution of coins between the participant and two computer-generated players. The results showed that the high-power group responded more quickly than the low-power group when they were the victims of unfairness, but not when they benefited from an unfair distribution of the coins.

In the second experiment, 265 participants were asked to observe the money-distribution game rather than being active players. When they watched as one computer-generated player repeatedly received fewer coins than the other players, the high-power group was significantly slower than a control group in perceiving unfair situations that affected others. In the third experiment, similar results emerged as the high-power group was also slower to perceive unfair situations when they benefited from the unfair advantage.

Lead researcher Takuya Sawaoka, a doctoral student in psychology at Stanford University, commented on the study:

“Our findings [sic] suggest that powerful people are slower to notice unfair situations that victimize other people, and this converges with other research demonstrating that the powerful are less empathetic to the plight of others.”

In the last experiment, 100 participants played a game where they either benefited or were victims of an unfair distribution of wages by an employer. When participants were treated unfairly, the high-power group switched more quickly to another employer, while the low-power group stayed with the same employer longer even though they had received unfairly low wages.

This last experiment, in particular, was geared to help understand the persistence of income inequality and "white privilege" in American society. As the experiments were designed to make participants feel powerful or powerless for only a temporary period of time, it might only highlight the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the injustices faced by low-power groups on a daily basis.

According to Sawaoka, it is important to note the implications of the study in the real world, namely that:

“People who are repeatedly victimized by unfairness are going to end up with fewer resources and opportunities. Effectively responding to unfair situations (e.g., by seeking out more equitable outcomes) could enable the powerful to maintain their higher social standing. In contrast, because powerless people are slower to perceive and respond to unfairness, they may become more vulnerable to exploitation. These processes could end up perpetuating gaps between the powerful and powerless.”

The study demonstrates, in a patterned manner, the urgent need to understand and evaluate the ways in which some groups have benefits over others. More thorough research about how low-power and high-power groups are psychologically different might aid in our understanding of how their brains function and what we can do to eliminate certain internalized biases in both groups. 

It might also be useful to determine whether the values and biases of certain participants affected the way they perceived the treatment of others. So that if they are honest and fair, they will most likely notice the unfair treatment of others. Sweeping generalizations might be a flaw in the case of this particular study. Best to tread with caution.