Social power is transactional. When one group loses, another group gains. We may understand this in economic terms. Money is transactional. People give up money for some type of product.
What is not so obvious is that power is also transactional. We think that power is one-way. That we have power, and that is that — that we have something good, and that is the end of the story. We do not see that we lose something, too, when we gain power.
What Is Power
Sociologist Max Weber defined power as “the ability to exercise one’s will over others” (Power and Authority, 2016). For example, consider a politician who can create economic policies that can shape a family’s future. Or, social power, a form of power in which one group has more resources, access, or perceived social value than another.
Furthermore, power is relational. It is not something that we merely have; rather, it is something we do. As sociologist Michel Foucuault describes, “Power is not something that is acquired, seized, or shared, something that one holds on to or allows to slip away; power is exercised from innumerable points, in the interplay of non-egalitarian and mobile relations” (Consterdine & Taylor, 2025).
The Psychology Behind It
Moral judgment depends on whether power is justified. Our moral conscience recognizes that a group holding power over another without good reason is wrong. Social dominance theory suggests that people create justifications to legitimize social hierarchies (Keene, 2025).
The brain is also highly sensitive to fairness. In one study, participants were presented with certain monetary transfer scenarios in which they were to receive one amount of money while another person were to receive a different amount (e.g. I get $10 and the other person gets $50). Researchers examined activity in reward-related brain regions, specifically the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) and ventral striatum. They found that participants who, in the scenario, started out as more wealthy shower stronger brain responses to when others received money versus when they did (California Institute of Technology, 2010).
Overall, these findings indicate that the brain is attuned to social contexts and shows heightened reward sensitivity when resources go to those who are disadvantaged.
Merit Based Power
Our brains need a legitimization of power to keep a moral conscience. This legitimization often is merit.
Consider a sports coach. This is a position of social power because they influence the outcomes of the team. Coaches create a practice schedule, the team’s lineup, and they can remove people from the team. Not just anybody can be a coach; the coach needs to possess some sort of merit, and they need to continuously prove that merit. Before being a coach, they may need a certain credential. They need to continuously prove that they are fit for this role as a coach. This is through effective practice schedules and effective coaching style. If the coach doesn’t live up to their role – if they are incompetent, not professional, or too demanding – the team may disrespect the coach, not listen, and not try.
Similarly, a teacher has a socially powerful role. They can use their will to influence, at least, students’ behavior in their classroom. They give out directions and punishments, chose curriculum; they have the power to expel a student, which will negatively impact college admissions. Teachers need some sort of merit to be able to influence their will over others. This is a degree, and similarly, a sense of earned respect.
Legitimizing Power
In social power, the same applies. There needs to be some sort of merit or reason that the group has social power. Our brains cognitively code this in order to keep our sense of morals.
What happens when there is no merit? Or when that merit becomes delegitimized? The group at the top will work tirelessly to prove the merit. Just as teachers went through lots of schooling to teach, and coaches lots of practicing and improvement to coach, people in a social role need to continuously prove that their role is justified.
This justification is not only exhausting, it also can come at the cost of our humanity and empathy. We may excuse the suffering of others, detach ourselves from it, slowly callousing our hearts.
Why We Miss This
Why is power so often portrayed as purely good? Part of the reason is psychological. Those born into power may struggle to imagine life without it; it becomes invisible, yet deeply tied to identity. Losing power introduces uncertainty — about safety, meaning, and self-worth — and the mind resists that uncertainty.
Even when power is earned, attachment remains strong. Letting go can feel like invalidating past effort or confronting unresolved motivations. Self-perception theory helps explain this: when beliefs are unclear, we infer them from our actions. If someone continues to act from a position of power, they may conclude that they enjoy it or that it is inherently good — even if that belief primarily serves to reduce internal conflict.
In some cases, power also functions as a cover for unmet emotional needs. It can provide a sense of belonging or validation without addressing deeper disconnection.
How Power Disconnects Us
Power blocks empathy (Segal, 2019). It also decreases our ability to take the perspectives of others. Research suggests that power can reduce empathy and perspective-taking. In one study, participants primed to feel powerful were less likely to consider how others would view their actions (Azab, 2020). This matters because empathy supports connection, moral judgment, and psychological well-being. When power dulls empathy, it quietly erodes these foundations.
Empathy is important because it improves connections, lowers stress, can protect us against burnout, and guides our moral compass (Segal, 2018).
Final Takeaways and Considerations
Power isn’t a permanent possession or a moral reward — it’s a trade. When power shifts, it doesn’t automatically mean something has gone wrong. It often means something human is being returned: perspective, connection, humility, or relief from having to constantly justify dominance. Losing power can feel like loss only if we’ve been taught to see power as the ultimate good, rather than as something that always costs us something in return.
We want to be loved for who we are, not for what power we provide or what external mold we fit into.
References
Azab, M. (2020, June 9). The brain under the influence of power. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/neuroscience-in-everyday-life/202006/the-brain-under-the-influence-power
California Institute of Technology. (2010, February 24). Scientists find first physiological evidence of brain’s response to inequality. ScienceDaily. Retrieved January 22, 2026 from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100224132453.htm
Consterdine, A., & Taylor, W. G. (2025, October 6). Full article: Reappraising theorisations of power in the coach–athlete relationship: Future Directions for Sports Coaching Research. Taylor & Francis Online. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21640629.2025.2569943
Keene, B. (2025). Social Dominance Theory: Research Starters: EBSCO research. EBSCO. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/social-dominance-theory
Segal, E. (2018). Five ways empathy is good for your health. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/social-empathy/201812/five-ways-empathy-is-good-your-health
Segal, E. (2019). Power blocks empathy. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/social-empathy/201909/power-blocks-empathy
[Author removed at request of original publisher]. (2016, April 8). Power and authority. Introduction to Sociology: Understanding and Changing the Social World. https://pressbooks.howardcc.edu/soci101/chapter/14-1-power-and-authority/
In Common Light 
Leave a comment