17.To be with me and keep me company.
18.To understand what I do or have done.
19.To listen.
20.To give good advice.
21.To provide what I need.
22.To show their concern for me.
23.To take care of me when I’m ill.
24.For very little, I prefer to solve my problems on
my own.
Perception of receiving social support items
When I am in trouble or in need, I feel that they
actually do:
25.Understand my feelings.
26.Comfort me.
27.Stay with me and keep me company.
28.Understand what I do or have done.
29.Listen.
30.Give me good advice.
31.Provide what I need.
32.Show their concern for me.Emotional reactions to receiving social
support
When I receive support, I feel ...
33.Grateful.
34.Much better.
35.Ashamed or guilty because I couldn’t handle my
troubles on my own.
36.Well taken care of.
37.Weak.
38.Loved.
39.Useless.
40.Happy.
41.More motivated to solve my problems.
42.Upset.
43.Eager to help in return.
44.Secure.
45.Understood.
Notes : Items are rated on a 6-point scale ranging
from: 1 5Disagree strongly to 6 5Agree strongly).
Reproduced with permission.
Power Behavioral System Scale (PBSS)
(Shaver et al., 2011 ).
Variable
Shaver et al. (2011) tentatively proposed a new behavioral system concerned with power or assertion.
The main goal of the power system is to remove threats and obstacles that interfere with one’s sense of autonomy
or constrain one’s access to valuable resources. With a sense of power, people can more easily help others,
acquire resources, and gain access to desirable mates. Once a person’s power system is activated, he or she is
likely to call upon a repertoire of behaviors aimed at protecting or restoring power or influence, such as asserting
oneself, establishing one’s authority, expressing confidence in one’s strengths and opinions, and deterring others
from exerting control over one’s resources. As with the other behavioral systems, failed attempts to exercise
power or influence can result in the development of one or both of two nonoptimal, secondary power strategies:
hyperactivation and deactivation of the power system.
Hyperactivation strategies include efforts to maintain a sense of power, even when it is not objectively chal-
lenged; an indiscriminate urge to assert power over others; frequent anger and hostility toward others; and a
proclivity to attack others following even minimal signs of competition. Deactivation, in contrast, involves termi-
nating or ‘shutting off’ the power system even in the presence of an explicit assault or provocation. Deactivation
involves avoidance of situations that call for activation of the power system and assertion of one’s rights and
opinions, such as competitions, arguments, or disputes (see Keltner, Gruenfeld, & Anderson, 2003 ).
Description
The PBSS asks respondents to think about situations in which they had a disagreement or conflict with another per-
son or group, and to rate the extent to which each item is or is not self-descriptive using a 7-point Likert-type response
scale. Item and factor analyses indicated that the items, a s intended, coherently assess two secondary power-system
strategies: hyperactivation and deactivation. The 14 hyperactivation items focus on the urgent and exaggerated need
for power and control over resources and other people, frequent bouts of anger and aggression, and anxieties and443 BEHAVIORAL SYSTEMS SCALES
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES