Self-Presentation Styles, Status, and Influence

This research examined effects of individual self-presentation styles on influence in groups. Perceived competence and social acceptance both play a role in determining how much influence group members enjoy. Aggrandizing and deprecating self-presentation styles may affect perceived competence, social acceptance, and ultimately influence. I predicted that aggrandizing self-presentation would lead to perceptions of competence and that self-deprecation would lead to social acceptance. The anticipated strength of those trends, however, was unclear, and I proposed that they would vary depending on status. I conducted two studies designed to assess whether aggrandizing or deprecating self-presentation styles lead to differences in influence outcomes for high and low-status individuals. In Study 1, participants gave feedback and a promotion recommendation for a fictitious (male or female) job candidate based on employee evaluation information presenting the candidate as either deprecating or aggrandizing. The main findings from Study 1 were that aggrandizers were rated as less likable than deprecators. No other predictions were supported. Study 2 was an online experiment in which participants made hiring recommendations in reference to résumés from fictitious applicants that varied by race, gender, and presentation style (aggrandizing, deprecating, or neutral). Results provided some evidence that low-status candidates were punished for using aggrandizing self-presentation strategies. The results of the studies suggest no one- best technique for self-presentation and that there may be costs for aggrandizing or deprecating depending on race and gender.

Turkish Security Policymaking on Nuclear Issues: Conceptualizing Advanced Cooperative Security Strategies

Turkey is a non-nuclear member of a nuclear alliance in a region where nuclear proliferation is of particular concern. As the only North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member that has a border with the Middle East, Turkish officials argue that Turkey cannot solely rely on NATO guarantees in addressing the regional security challenges. However, Turkey has not been able to formulate a security policy that reconciles its quest for independence, its NATO membership, the bilateral relationship with the United States, and regional engagement in the Middle East. This dissertation assesses the strategic implications of Turkey’s perceptions of the U.S./NATO nuclear and conventional deterrence on nuclear issues. It explores three case studies by the process tracing of Turkish policymakers’ nuclear-related decisions on U.S. tactical nuclear weapons deployed in Europe, national air and missile defense, and Iran’s nuclear program. The study finds that the principles of Turkish security policymaking do not incorporate a fundamentally different reasoning on nuclear issues than conventional deterrence. Nuclear weapons and their delivery systems do not have a defining role in Turkish security and defense strategy. The decisions are mainly guided by non-nuclear considerations such as Alliance politics, modernization of the domestic defense industry, and regional influence. The dissertation argues that Turkey could formulate more effective and less risky security policies on nuclear issues by emphasizing the cooperative security approaches within the NATO Alliance over confrontational measures. The findings of this dissertation reveal that a major transformation of Turkish security policymaking is required to end the crisis of confidence with NATO, redefinition of the strategic partnership with the US, and a more cautious approach toward the Middle East. The dissertation argues that Turkey should promote proactive measures to reduce, contain, and counter risks before they develop into real threats, as well as contribute to developing consensual confidence-building measures to reduce uncertainty.