Psychological Size and Psychological Distance in Manager-Subordinate Relationships

Abstract The roles of status and affect in the working relationships in the United States among 125 lower level managers and the 35 middle level managers to whom they reported was examined by using the Grasha-Ichiyama Psychological Size and Distance Scale (GIPSDS). The GIPSDS uses a circle-drawing task to determine perceptions of interpersonal status (psychological size) and affect (psychological distance) and a 22-item status-affect rating scale to identify the specific psychological dimensions underlying the drawings. Boss-subordinate exchanges also were measured by using Graen et al.'S (1982) Leader-Member Exchange Scale (LMX). Subordinates drew circles that estimated their psychological size or personal status, as larger than the circles their bosses drew for them; the bosses, in turn, drew circles that estimated their personal status as larger than the circles that their subordinates drew for them. Lower level managers' ratings of their personal knowledge and expertise were the best predictor of their psychological size, whereas ratings of personal dominance were the best predictor for middle level managers. Compared with their subordinates, middle level managers reported less psychological distance or more positive affect in those interactions. Rating scale items assessing emotional support in such interactions accounted for the largest share of unique variance (independent variance accounted for by a particular variable) in predicting LMX scores.