A self-categorization model of leadership is introduced (leaders have the prototypical characteristics of a psychologically salient in-group) and contrasted with leadership categorization theory (leaders have the appropriate stereotypical properties of a leader schema) in a 2 × 2 × 2 experiment. Under conditions of high or low group salience, and in anticipation of a group activity, subjects evaluated the leadership effectiveness of a randomly nominated leader who was group prototypical or nonprototypical and whose behavior was stereotypical or nonstereotypical of a leader schema. As predicted from the authors' self-categorization analysis, group protoypicality was a significant basis for leadership for subjects who identified with the group but notfor those who did not. There was a general effect, consistent with leader categorization theory, whereby stereotypical leaders were perceived to be more effective than nonstereotypical leaders. However} as predicted, this effect was weaker under high group identification.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrams, D. (1994). Social self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 473-483.
2.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdills handbook of leadership: Theory, research and managerial applications. New York: Free Press.
4.
Bray, R. M., Johnson, D., & Chilstrom, J. T., Jr. (1982). Social influence by group members with minority opinions: A comparison of Hollander and Moscovici. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 78-88.
5.
Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475-482.
6.
Brewer, M. B. (1993). The role of distinctiveness in social identity and group behaviour. In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 1-16). Hemel Hempstead, UKHarvester Wheatsheaf.
7.
Brewer, M. B., & Miller, N. (1996). Intergroup relations. Buckingham, UKROpen University Press.
8.
Cronshaw, S. F., & Lord, R. G. (1987). Effects of categorization, attribution, and encoding processes on leadership perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 97-106.
9.
Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125-145.
10.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.
11.
Fiedler, F. E. (1965). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 149-190). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
12.
Fiedler, F. E. (1971). Leadership. Mornistown, NJ: General Learning.
13.
Fiedler, F. E. (1981). Leadership effectiveness. American Behavioral Scientist, 24, 619-632.
14.
Fielding, K. S., & Hogg, M. A. (1997). Social identity, self-categorization and leadership: A field study of small interactive groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 39-51.
15.
Fiske, S. T. (1993a). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. American Psychologist, 48, 621-628.
16.
Fiske, S. T. (1993b). Social cognition and social perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 155-194.
17.
Fiske, S. T., & Depret, E. (1996). Control, interdependence and power: Understanding social cognition in its social context. European Review of Social Psychology, 7, 31-61.
18.
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
19.
Graumann, C. F., & Moscovici, S. (Eds.). (1986). Changing conceptions of leadership. New York: Springer-Verlag.
20.
Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. Hemel Hempstead, UKHarvester Wheatsheaf, and New York: New York University Press.
21.
Hogg, M. A. (1993). Group cohesiveness: A critical review and some new directions. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 85-111.
22.
Hogg, M. A. (1996a). Intragroup processes, group structure and social identity. In W. P. Robinson (Ed.), Social groups and identities: Developing the legacy of Henri Taffel (pp. 65-93). Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.
23.
Hogg, M. A. (1996b). Social identity, self-categorization, and the small group. In E. H. Witte & J. Davis (Eds.), Understanding-group behavior: Vol. 2. Small group processes and interpersonal relations (pp. 227-253). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
Hogg, M. A. (1997). Leadership processes in groups: Self-categorization and the rok of depersonalization. Unpublished research proposal to the Australian Research Council, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
25.
Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London and New York: Routledge.
26.
Hogg, M. A., Cooper-Shaw, L., & Holzworth, D. W. (1993). Studies of group prototypicality and depersonalized attraction in small interactive groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 175-180.
27.
Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1996). Intergroup relations and group solidarity: Effects of group identification and social beliefs on depersonalized attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 295-309.
28.
Hogg, M. A., & Hardie, E. A. (1991). Social attraction, personal attraction, and self-categorization: A field study. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 175-180.
29.
Hogg, M. A., Hardie, E. A., & Reynolds, K. J. (1995). Prototypical similarity, self-categorization, and depersonalized attraction: A perspective on group cohesiveness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 159-177.
30.
Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarter, 58, 255-269.
31.
Hogg, M. A., Turner, J. C., & Davidson, B. (1990). Polarized norms and social frames of reference: A test of the self-categorization theory of group polarization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 77-100.
32.
Hollander, E. P. (1958). Conformity, status, and idiosyncrasy credit. Psychological Review, 65, 117-127.
33.
House, R. J., & Baetz, M. L. (1990). Leadership: Some empirical generalizations and new research directions. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Leadership, participation, and group behavior (pp. 1-84). Greenwich, CT:JAI.
34.
Humphrey, R. (1985). How work roles influence perception: Structural-cognitive processes and organizational behavior. American Sociological Review, 50, 242-252.
35.
Hunt, J. G., Baliga, B. R., Dachler, H. P., & Schriesheim, C. A. (Eds.). (1988). Emerging leadership vistas. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
36.
Levine, J. M. (1989). Reaction to opinion deviance in small groups. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 187-231). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37.
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1990). Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 585-634.
38.
Lippitt, R., & White, R. (1943). The "social climate' of children's groups. In R. G. Barker, J. Kounin, & H. Wright (Eds.), Child behavior and development (pp. 485-508). New York: McGraw-Hill.
39.
Lord, R. G. (1977). Functional leadership behavior: Measurement and relations to social power and leadership perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 114-133.
40.
Lord, R. G. (1985). An information processing approach to social perception, leadership and behavioral measurement in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 87-28.
41.
Lord, R. G., & Alliger, G. M. (1985). A comparison of four information processing models of leadership and social perceptions. Human Relations, 38, 47-65.
42.
Lord, R. G., Foti, R. J., & DeVader, C. L. (1984). A test of leadership categorization theory: Internal structure, information processing, and leadership perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 343-378.
43.
Marques, J. M. (1990). The black-sheep effect Out-group homogeneity in social comparison settings. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances (pp. 131-151). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf, and New York: Springer-Verlag.
44.
Marques, J. M., & Paez, D. (1994). The "black sheep effect": Social categorization, rejection of ingroup deviates and perception of group variability. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 37-68.
45.
McGarty, C., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., David, B., & Wetherell, M. S. (1992). Group polarization as conformity to the prototypical group member. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 1-20.
46.
Meindl, J.. (1990). On leadership: An alternative view of the conventional wisdom. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 159-203). Greenwich, CT:JAI.
47.
Meindl, J. R. (1995). The romance of leadership as follower-centric theory: A social constructionist perspective. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 329-341.
48.
Messe, L. A., Kerr, N. L., & Sattler, D. N. (1992). "But some animals are more equal than others": The supervisor as a privileged status in group contexts. In S. Worchel, W. Wood, & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Group process and productivity (pp. 203-223). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
49.
Moreland, R. L., Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1994). Back to the future: Social psychological research on groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 527-555.
50.
Mullen, B., Salas, E., & Driskell, J. E. (1989). Salience, motivation, and artifact as contributions to the relation between participation rate and leadership. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 545-559.
51.
Nye, J. L., & Forsyth, D. R. (1991). The effects of prototype-based biases on leadership appraisals: A test of leadership categorization theory. Small Group Research, 22, 360-379.
52.
Palich, L. E., & Hom, P. W. (1992). The impact of leader power and behavior on leadership perceptions: A lisrel test of an expanded categorization theory of leadership model. Group and Organization Management;17, 279-296.
53.
Pavitt, C., & Sackaroff, P. (1990). Implicit theories of leadership and judgments of leadership among group members. Small Group Research, 21, 374-392.
54.
Peters, L. H., Hartke, D. D., & Pohlmann, J. T. (1985). Fiedler's contingency theory of leadership: An application of the meta-analytic procedure of Schmidt and Hunter. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 274-285.
55.
Pfeffer, J. (1977). The ambiguity of leadership. Academy of Management Review, 2, 104-112.
56.
Phillips, J. S., & Lord, R. G. (1981). Causal attributions and perceptions of leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28, 143-163.
57.
Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 174-220). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
58.
Rush, M. C., & Russell, J. E. A. (1988). Leader prototypes and prototype-contingent consensus in leader behavior descriptions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 88-104.
59.
Sande, G. N., Ellard, J. H., & Ross, M. (1986). Effect of arbitrary assigned status labels on self-perceptions and social perceptions: The mere position effectJournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 684-689.
60.
Sherif, M. (1966). In common predicament: Social psychology of intergroup conflict and cooperation. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
61.
Stogdill, R. (1974). Handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press.
62.
Strube, M. J., & Garcia, J. E. (1981). A meta-analytic investigation of Fiedler's contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 307-321.
63.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
64.
Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention, and attribution: Top of the head phenomena. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 249-288). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
65.
Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 776-793.
66.
Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and intergroup relations (pp. 15-40). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
67.
Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and the self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 77-122). Greenwich, CT:JAI.
68.
Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
69.
Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK, and New York: Blackwell.
70.
Yukl, G. (1981). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
