The relationship power inventory: Development and validation

Power is a central concept in relationships, yet existing self‐report measures of relationship power are not well validated and do not assess all aspects of power. To address this, we developed the Relationship Power Inventory (RPI), a self‐report measure of power for romantic partners. In Study 1, we identified the most important decision‐making domains in romantic relationships. In Study 2, we generated an item pool assessing relationship power, selected the best performing items for inclusion, and tested the convergent and divergent validity properties of the RPI. Study 3 revealed RPI scores predict observer ratings of power during decision‐making discussions and showed the RPI has good test–retest reliability. We discuss how the RPI can advance research on power in close relationships     

THE INFLUENCE OF UPWARD FEEDBACK ON SELF- AND FOLLOWER RATINGS OF LEADERSHIP

The impact of upward feedback (followers' perceptions of leadership provided to leaders) on leaders' self-evaluations and followers' subsequent ratings of leadership was assessed in a field setting. Subjects were 978 student leaders and their 1,232 followers. Results indicated that overall, leaders' behaviors as rated by followers improved after feedback. Leaders' self-evaluations following feedback became more similar to the evaluations provided by followers. Interestingly, when leaders were grouped according to whether feedback was positive, neutral, or negative based on agreement between self- and follower ratings, differences between groups in post-feedback self-evaluations and follower ratings emerged. Self-evaluations for leaders receiving negative feedback (high self- relative to followers' ratings) went down, while self-evaluations for leaders receiving positive feedback (low self- relative to follower's ratings) went up. Follower ratings of leaders who received negative feedback improved following feedback to leaders, while there was no change in follower ratings for those receiving positive feedback. Implications for using upward feedback in organizations are discussed.     

A META-ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONS AMONG TRAINING CRITERIA

An augmented framework for training criteria based on Kirkpatrick's (1959a, 1959b, 1960a, 1960b) model divides training reactions into affective and utility reactions, and learning into post-training measures of learning, retention, and behavior/skill demonstration. A total of 34 studies yielding 115 correlations were analyzed meta-analytically. Results included substantial reliabilities across training criteria and reasonable convergence among subdivisions of criteria within a larger level. Utility-type reaction measures were more strongly related to learning or on-the-job performance (transfer) than affective-type reaction measures. Moreover, utility-type reaction measures were stronger correlates of transfer than were measures of immediate or retained learning. These latter findings support recent concurrent thinking regarding use of reactions in training (e.g., Warr & Bunce, 1995). Implications for choosing and developing training criteria are discussed.