Virtues,Vices,and Political Influence in the U.S. Senate

Abstract

What qualities make a political leader more influential or less influential? Philosophers, political scientists, and psychologists have puzzled over this question, positing two opposing routes to political power—one driven by human virtues, such as courage and wisdom, and the other driven by vices, such as Machiavellianism and psychopathy. By coding nonverbal behaviors displayed in political speeches, we assessed the virtues and vices of 151 U.S. senators. We found that virtuous senators became more influential after they assumed leadership roles, whereas senators who displayed behaviors consistent with vices—particularly psychopathy—became no more influential or even less influential after they assumed leadership roles. Our results inform a long-standing debate about the role of morality and ethics in leadership and have important implications for electing effective government officials. Citizens would be wise to consider a candidate’s virtue in casting their votes, which might increase the likelihood that elected officials will have genuine concern for their constituents and simultaneously promote cooperation and progress in government.

Keywords

individual differences social influence organizations open data

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ambady

Rosenthal

(1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256–274.

Anderson

Brown

C. E.

(2010). The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 55–89.

Aristotle . (1962). Politics ( Sinclair

T. A.

, trans.). London, England: Penguin Classics.

Asendorpf

J. B.

(1987). Videotape reconstruction of emotions and cognitions related to shyness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 542–549.

Babiak

Neumann

C. S.

Hare

R. D.

(2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the walk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 174–193.

Baltes

P. B.

Staudinger

U. M.

(1993). The search for a psychology of wisdom. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 75–80.

Bartlett

M. Y.

DeSteno

(2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when it costs you. Psychological Science, 17, 319–325.

Brunswik

(1952). The conceptual framework of psychology (International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Vol. 1, No. 10). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Caspi

Bem

D. J.

(1990). Personality continuity and change across the life course. In Pervin

L. A.

(Ed.), Handbook of personality theory and research (pp. 549–575). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

10.

Chase

I. D.

(1991). Vacancy chains. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 133–154.

11.

Chen

Lee-Chai

A. Y.

Bargh

J. A.

(2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 173–187.

12.

Chown

J. D.

Liu

C. C.

(2015). Geography and power in an organizational forum: Evidence from the U.S. Senate Chamber. Strategic Management Journal, 36, 177–196.

13.

Christie

Geis

F. L.

(1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. New York, NY: Academic Press.

14.

Cohen

T. R.

Panter

A. T.

Turan

(2012). Guilt proneness and moral character. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 355–359.

15.

Curry

Chesters

M. J.

Viding

(2011). The psychopath’s dilemma: The effects of psychopathic personality traits in one-shot games. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 804–809.

16.

Dunn

J. R.

Schweitzer

M. E.

(2005). Feeling and believing: The influence of emotion on trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 736–748.

17.

Fleiss

J. L.

(1986). The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York, NY: Wiley.

18.

Fowler

J. H.

(2006a). Connecting the Congress: A study of cosponsorship networks. Political Analysis, 14, 456–487.

19.

Fowler

J. H.

(2006b). Legislative cosponsorship networks in the US House and Senate. Social Networks, 28, 454–465.

20.

Fridlund

A. J.

(1992). The behavioral ecology and sociality of human faces. In Clark

M. S.

(Ed.), Emotion (Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 13, pp. 90–121). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

21.

Funder

D. C.

Sneed

C. D.

(1993). Behavioral manifestations of personality: An ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 479–490.

22.

Hare

R. D.

(2006). Psychopathy: A clinical and forensic overview. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 29, 709–724.

23.

Keltner

Gruenfeld

D. H.

Anderson

(2003). Power, approach, and inhibition. Psychological Review, 110, 265–284.

24.

Keltner

Kring

A. M.

(1998). Emotion, social function, and psychopathology. Review of General Psychology, 2, 320–342.

25.

Lilienfeld

S. O.

Waldman

I. D.

Landfield

Watts

A. L.

Rubenzer

Faschingbauer

T. R.

(2012). Fearless dominance and the U.S. Presidency: Implications of psychopathic personality traits for successful and unsuccessful political leadership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 489–505.

26.

Liu

C. C.

Srivastava

S. B.

(2015a). Pulling closer and moving apart: Interaction, identity, and influence in the U.S. Senate, 1973 to 2009. American Sociological Review, 80, 192–217.

27.

Liu

C. C.

Srivastava

S. B.

(2015b). Stamps of power and conflict: Imprinting and influence in the U.S. Senate, 1973-2005 (Rotman School of Management Working Paper No. 2644603). Retrieved from Social Science Research Network Web site: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2644603

28.

Machiavelli

(1961). The prince ( Bull

, trans.). London, England: Penguin Classics. (Original work published 1532)

29.

Mathieu

Neumann

C. S.

Hare

R. D.

Babiak

(2014). A dark side of leadership: Corporate psychopathy and its influence on employee well-being and job satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 59, 83–88.

30.

McCullough

M. E.

Emmons

R. A.

Tsang

J. A.

(2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 112–127.

31.

Park

Peterson

Seligman

M. E.

(2004). Strengths of character and well-being. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 603–619.

32.

Paulhus

D. L.

Neumann

C. S.

Hare

R. D.

(2015). Manual for the Hare Self-Report Psychopathy Scale. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.

33.

Paulhus

D. L.

Williams

K. M.

(2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–563.

34.

Piff

P. K.

Dietze

Feinberg

Stancato

D. M.

Keltner

(2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 883–899.

35.

Raskin

Hall

C. S.

(1979). A narcissistic personality inventory. Psychological Reports, 45, 590.

36.

Scarr

McCartney

(1983). How people make their own environments: A theory of genotype → environment effects. Child Development, 54, 424–435.

37.

Schaumberg

R. L.

Flynn

F. J.

(2012). Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown: The link between guilt proneness and leadership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 327–342.

38.

ten Brinke

Black

P. J.

Porter

Carney

D. R.

(2015). Psychopathic personality traits predict competitive wins and cooperative losses in negotiation. Personality and Individual Differences, 79, 116–122.

39.

Theriault

S. M.

(2013). The Gingrich senators: The roots of partisan warfare in Congress. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

40.

Van Kleef

G. A.

De Dreu

C. K.

Pietroni

Manstead

A. S.

(2006). Power and emotion in negotiation: Power moderates the interpersonal effects of anger and happiness on concession making. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 557–581.

41.

Van Vugt

Hogan

Kaiser

R. B.

(2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution: Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63, 182–196.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.37 MB

0.58 MB