Emergent power hierarchies and group performance (Published online: 7 Oct. 2014)

In newly formed groups, informal hierarchies emerge automatically and readily. In this study, we argue that emergent group hierarchies enhance group performance (Hypothesis 1) and we assume that the more the power hierarchy within a group corresponds to the task-competence differences of the individual group members, the better the group performs (Hypothesis 2). Twelve three-person groups and 28 four-person groups were investigated while solving the Winter Survival Task. Results show that emerging power hierarchies positively impact group performance but the alignment between task-competence and power hierarchy did not affect group performance. Thus, emergent power hierarchies are beneficial for group performance and although they were on average created around individual group members' competence, this correspondence was not a prerequisite for better group performance.

A model of gender prejudice, power, and discrimination: How hierarchy-enhancing factors predominate over hierarchy-attenuating factors

Gender inequalities remain an issue in our society and particularly in the workplace. Several factors can explain this gender difference in top-level managerial positions such as career ambitions but also biases against women. In our chapter, we propose a model explaining why gender inequalities and particularly discrimination against women is still present in our societies despite social norms and existing legislation on gender equality. To this purpose, we review research on discrimination through two different approaches, (a) a prejudice approach through the justification-suppression model developed by Crandall and Eshleman (2003) and (b) a power approach through the social dominance theory (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). In our work, we integrate these two approaches and propose a model of gender prejudice, power and discrimination. The integration of these two approaches contributes to a better understanding of how discrimination against women is formed and maintained over time.

Dial M for Murder: A Case of Passion Killing, Criminal Evidence and Sultanic Power in Medieval India

This paper considers the structures and applications of the criminal judicial system in the Islamic Later Middle Period as it developed in India under the sultans of Delhi (1200-1400 CE). A fundamental issue in crime and punishment is the relationship between sultanic power and religious authority. Particularly at stake in this relationship is the question of who can sanction the highest form of punishment, i.e. the death penalty (siyāsa). Contemporary historians and scholars in the study of religion investigating the relationship between sharīʿa and siyāsa to reveal the extent and limits of sultanic power show a system of governance that allowed for the delegation of authority, particularly in the area of the judiciary, from the sultan down to viziers and judges. Some scholars depict the relationship between the ʿulamāʾ and the sultan as a kind of stand off. The actual dynamics of legal jurisdiction were much more complex. This study proposes a new interpretive framework for understanding the relationship between political power and religious authority through a critical analysis of the criminal judicial system, law, and historical narrative. In particular, I consider a murder case described by Shams al-dīn Sirāj ʿAfīf in one of the most significant histories written in the later Delhi Sultanate, the Tārīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī.