Measuring the motive for power using conditional reasoning: some preliminary findings

Zvonimir Galić, Mitja Ružojčić, Andreja Bubić, Nataša Trojak, Lucija Zeljko, James M. LeBreton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations


The conditional reasoning approach to personality assessment is a promising new method that has the potential to predict a range of work-related outcomes. Aiming to expand the approach to organizational leadership field, we describe six studies that explored the feasibility of using conditional reasoning to measure the motive for power. We identified an initial set of items based on work by Lawrence James and denoted this set the Conditional Reasoning Test for Power (CRT-P). In Study 1, we investigated CRT-P’s convergent and discriminant validity. In Studies 2a and 2b, we tested the implicit nature and fakeability of the CRT-P, by comparing test responses and eye-movement data between honest responding and simulated selection conditions. In Studies 3a and 3b, using large samples of employees, we tested if CRT-P scores predicted whether individuals occupied leadership positions. Finally, in Study 4 we tested whether CRT-P scores are related to subordinate ratings of leadership effectiveness. Our findings gave certain support to the CRT-P’s convergent and discriminant validity. Both faking studies indicated that the test is less fakeable compared to traditional self-report surveys, whereas the criterion-related validity studies demonstrated that CRT-P scores correlated both with organizational leadership occupancy and leadership effectiveness ratings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)175-191
Number of pages17
JournalEuropean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Issue number2
StatePublished - 2021

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management


Dive into the research topics of 'Measuring the motive for power using conditional reasoning: some preliminary findings'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this