View article

Across different experiments we show that individual differences in Honesty-Humility predict exploitation in economic games, and that this relation is moderated by situational power. Power was manipulated by comparing games in which allocators either had absolute power (dictator game), intermediate (delta game), or shared power (ultimatum game) over joint outcomes. We developed the power-exploitation affordances hypothesis that predicts that allocators with lower Honesty-Humility act more exploitative when they have absolute power than when their power is intermediate or shared. Additionally, we also tested these predictions for the actual earnings in these games. The results were generally supportive of our main hypotheses. Our findings contribute to understanding situational and personality effects on how individuals behave in positions of power (e.g., leaders).