群体原型领导者的评价与支持:二十年实证研究的元分析

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Social Influence Pub Date : 2017-01-02 DOI:10.1080/15534510.2017.1316771
Nicolas Barreto, M. Hogg
{"title":"群体原型领导者的评价与支持:二十年实证研究的元分析","authors":"Nicolas Barreto, M. Hogg","doi":"10.1080/15534510.2017.1316771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The key premise of the social identity theory of leadership, that group prototypical leaders are more favorably evaluated than less prototypical leaders, is supported by twenty years of research. To establish overall how much variance in leader evaluation is attributable to leader prototypicality we conducted a meta-analysis of 35 independent studies (N = 6678). Prototypicality accounted for 24% of variance in leader evaluation. There was a large overall effect (r = .49), which was moderated by research method and type of evaluation. The relationship was stronger in correlational studies (r = .60) than experiments (r = .35), and on measures of leader trust (r = .63) than effectiveness (r = .43). Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46580,"journal":{"name":"Social Influence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"78","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of and support for group prototypical leaders: a meta-analysis of twenty years of empirical research\",\"authors\":\"Nicolas Barreto, M. Hogg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15534510.2017.1316771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The key premise of the social identity theory of leadership, that group prototypical leaders are more favorably evaluated than less prototypical leaders, is supported by twenty years of research. To establish overall how much variance in leader evaluation is attributable to leader prototypicality we conducted a meta-analysis of 35 independent studies (N = 6678). Prototypicality accounted for 24% of variance in leader evaluation. There was a large overall effect (r = .49), which was moderated by research method and type of evaluation. The relationship was stronger in correlational studies (r = .60) than experiments (r = .35), and on measures of leader trust (r = .63) than effectiveness (r = .43). Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Influence\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"78\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Influence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2017.1316771\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Influence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2017.1316771","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 78

摘要

领导力社会认同理论的关键前提是,群体原型型领导者比非原型型领导者得到更有利的评价,这一理论得到了20多年研究的支持。为了全面确定领导者评价中有多少差异可归因于领导者原型性,我们对35项独立研究(N = 6678)进行了荟萃分析。在领导评价中,原型性占24%的方差。总体效应较大(r = .49),受研究方法和评价类型的影响。在相关研究(r = 0.60)中,这种关系强于实验研究(r = 0.35),在领导信任(r = 0.63)的测量中,这种关系强于有效性(r = 0.43)。讨论了理论意义和未来发展方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of and support for group prototypical leaders: a meta-analysis of twenty years of empirical research
Abstract The key premise of the social identity theory of leadership, that group prototypical leaders are more favorably evaluated than less prototypical leaders, is supported by twenty years of research. To establish overall how much variance in leader evaluation is attributable to leader prototypicality we conducted a meta-analysis of 35 independent studies (N = 6678). Prototypicality accounted for 24% of variance in leader evaluation. There was a large overall effect (r = .49), which was moderated by research method and type of evaluation. The relationship was stronger in correlational studies (r = .60) than experiments (r = .35), and on measures of leader trust (r = .63) than effectiveness (r = .43). Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Influence
Social Influence PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊介绍: Social Influence is a journal that provides an integrated focus for research into this important, dynamic, and multi-disciplinary field. Topics covered include: conformity, norms, social influence tactics such as norm of reciprocity, authority, scarcity, interpersonal influence, persuasion, power, advertising, mass media effects, political persuasion, propaganda, comparative influence, compliance, minority influence, influence in groups, cultic influence, social movements, social contagions, rumors, resistance to influence, influence across cultures, and the history of influence research.
期刊最新文献
Social Dominance Orientation and exposure to violence as predictors of support for past peace agreements Death of the social self? Comparing the effects of ostracism to mortality salience Mere presence effect on pro-environmental behavior: exploring the role of social influence ‘We are looking for people like you’ – new technique of social influence as a tool of improving response rate in surveys The price of (dis)trust – profiling believers of (dis)information in the Hungarian context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1