The Effects of Prototype-Based Biases on Leadership Appraisals

Abstract

Leadership categorization theory suggests that leaders who display characteristics and abilities that match observers' schematic conception of an effective leader will be more favorably evaluated than leaders who violate observers' leadership prototypes. In a test of this model, 92 male and 84 female subjects endorsing a number of different leadership prototypes were instructed to evaluate a male or female leader who acted in a task-oriented or socioemotional-oriented manner. In rating leader effectiveness, subjects showed a clear bias in favor of leaders who matched their particular prototypes, although males tended to base their ratings on prototypes more so than females.!n ratings of leader collegiality, however, prototype-based biases were noted only when subjects evaluated female leaders. These ratings were not always consistent with the predictions of leadership categorization theory. These findings suggest that biases against female leaders may stem, in part, from the incongruity between subordinates' leadership prototypes and stereotypical conceptions of men and women.

Romance of leadership and management decision making

“…(2) Moreover, it can be assumed that followers influence their leaders' behaviour by their feedback and behaviour. Leaders who meet their followers' expectations and demands have a better chance of being effective as they can expect more motivation, support, and are given more credit for results (Lord & Emrich, 2001;Lord et al, 1984;Nye & Forsyth, 1991). Accordingly, Kenney, Schwartz-Kenney, and Blascovich (1996) identified followers' criteria for leaders' being ''worthy of influence'' (p. 1128).…”

Supervisors and teachers’ influence on expectations on empowering leadership among students in vocational education and training

“…Yukl 2013). Social cognitive research has demonstrated how schemas and implicit theories significantly influence judgements, choices, and behaviours (Ayman and Chemers 1983;Engle and Lord 1997;Fiske and Taylor 2013;Greenwald et al 2009;Hunt et al 1990;Lord et al 2001;Nye and Forsyth 1991;Porr and Fields 2006;Rush and Russell 1988;Ajzen 1991).…”

A Social Identity Theory of Leadership

“…They should also be interested in others and be able to create commitment to the group and extract extra effort from, and generally empower, members of the group. Social psychology's emphasis on social cognition has produced an extension of implicit leadership theory (Hollander & Julian, 1969) called leader categorization theory (e.g., Lord, Foti, & DeVader, 1984;Nye & Forsyth, 1991;Palich & Hom, 1992;Rush & Russell, 1988; also see Nye & Simonetta, 1996). People have preconceptions about how leaders should behave in general and in specific leadership situations.…”