Psychologists say that power corrupts, via WSJ

Psychologists say that power corrupts, via WSJ. I know that this thesis is pretty widely accepted, but I want to snipe at it. I think we may be mistaking correlation for causation. The general arc of my argument is that thuggishness may (sometimes) lead to power, instead of the other way around.

First, all the cited psych studies showing "nice guys finish first" are from areas with dense social networks (dorms, sororities, chimp clans) and repeated person-to-person interactions. Not surprisingly, likability translates to popularity here. But I don't see any particular reason why that conclusion should translate to accumulation of power through job interviews or elections. I'm going out on a limb here, but perhaps the qualities that make frat boys popular are not the same qualities that put CEOs in power.

Second, at risk of alienating a lot of my friends in political psychology, I'm not a big fan of gimmicky priming studies. For instance: tell me about a time when you felt powerful, then write the letter E on your head. You wrote it backwards? See -- power corrupts.

Err... run that by me again? At what point does this experiment measure "power," and "corruption," and where does it demonstrate a casual relationship between the two? Sure, the researchers who did this study can do a song and dance about it, but at the end of the day, there are a lot of leaps in the logic. The study is gimmicky. Interesting maybe, but nowhere close to conclusive.

I completely accept the notion that our minds move between different mental states and that primed manipulations can nudge us from one state to another. But I'm not persuaded that we've mapped the set of states and priming cues in enough detail to draw general conclusions -- particularly when treatments and responses are measured in ways that never occur in normal human experience.

Third, the idea that transparency might fix things is nice, but lacking evidence. This is a place where careful study of incentives and strategy could add a lot of leverage. Go game theory!

Parting shot: I'm not anti-niceness or pro-corruption, but I think we often demonize authority and authority figures. There are an awful lot of social problems that best resolved through the benevolent use of authority, and I know plenty of people who live up to that charge. To the extent that power has a corrupting tendency, we should be looking for, promoting, and celebrating those who are proof against it.