- We developed a preference elicitation tool for intrinsic preferences for autonomy and power. We have implemented several large data collections to study the individual determinants of preferences for autonomy and power, as well as their relation to political views, occupational choices, socioeconomic characteristics and psychological traits. A large general population data collection in nine countries was performed to assess cultural differences in preferences for autonomy.
- We find that a majority of individuals display intrinsic preferences for choice autonomy, but a significant minority is also averse to own choice., but there is substantial heterogeneity within the population. The methodology and results on individual heterogeneity are contained in a working paper (Freundt, Herz and Kopp, 2023).
- We find that intrinsic preferences for autonomy are negatively correlated with the degree of individualism at the country level. These results are informative regarding the debate about the relationship between individualism and the need for autonomy, and point to the importance to differentiate between intrinsic and instrumental needs in this respect. They also suggest that choice autonomy may have attributes similar to a consumption good.
- We analyzed whether intrinsic preferences for autonomy are moderated by the identity of the individual that would otherwise take decisions. We find that, in the domain of political identity, this is indeed the case. Individuals are more averse to give up their autonomy if they do not share the political identity of the potential delegate. This finding points to an additional channel that inhibits the formation of efficient institutions if constituents do not share the same identity. The results of this subproject have been published in a working paper (Freundt and Herz, 2024).
- We analyzed the relationship between intrinsic preferences for autonomy, employment choices, and political views. No significant correlations could be identified in the data.
- With respect to intrinsic preferences for power, we similarly find that individuals display intrinsic preferences for power, but a significant minority is averse to exercising power. Interestingly, we find that the intrinsic desire for power is negatively correlated with preferences for equality. In addition, we find strong correlations between intrinsic preferences for power and autocractic tendencies. Our results thus point to interesting correlations between intrinsic preferences for power and underlying personality traits.
The final part of the overall project was concerned with reactions to being subjected to power and control. In a first subproject, we studied control aversion in hierarchies, and we found that negative reactions to being controlled were less pronounced when control was exercised higher up in an organizational hierarchy. The results of this subproject are written up in a working paper (de Chiara, Engl, Herz and Manna, 2022).
We also studied whether motivation to perform in a subordinate position is moderated by the perceived legitimacy of the controlling party. The novelty of our experimental design is that it fully controls for all pecuniary incentives that often covary with legitimacy, meaning that we exogenously vary determinants of perceived legitimacy, keeping pecuniary incentives constant. We find that perceived legitimacy is indeed associated with subordinate motivation, and thus show that the perceived legitimacy of decision hierarchies is an independent determinant of worker motivation. The results of this subproject are written up in a working paper (Herz and Zihlmann, 2024).
The final subproject combined the three central tenets of this grant, measurement of intrinsic preferences for autonomy, measurement of intrinsic preferences for power, and measurement of reactions to control, in one behavioral experiment to explore the relation between these constructs. As this was the last subproject to be implemented, we are still in the process of analyzing the relationships.
