IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v149y2018icp129-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Connectionism in action: Exploring the links between leader prototypes, leader gender, and perceptions of authentic leadership

Author

Listed:
  • Braun, Susanne
  • Peus, Claudia
  • Frey, Dieter

Abstract

Building on the connectionist model of leadership perceptions, this research investigates the relationships between leader gender and authentic leadership perceptions from a leadership prototype perspective. In a five-study series, we tested different cognitive processing dynamics that influenced leadership perceptions. Study 1 (N = 271) demonstrated that female leader targets increased authentic leadership perceptions. Study 2 (N = 171) showed this association for each of the four dimensions of authentic leadership. Study 3 (N = 100) assessed the relationship between leader gender and authentic leadership perceptions with implicit measures (i.e., the accessibility of female names and female typed hobbies). Study 4 (N = 246) extended this processing dynamic to consideration, another communal leadership style. Finally, a lexical decision making task in Study 5 (N = 200) indicated that prototype inconsistent leadership styles (initiating structure, autocratic leadership) slowed down automated processing for female leader targets. We discuss contributions to information processing approaches to leadership and practical implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Braun, Susanne & Peus, Claudia & Frey, Dieter, 2018. "Connectionism in action: Exploring the links between leader prototypes, leader gender, and perceptions of authentic leadership," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 129-144.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:149:y:2018:i:c:p:129-144
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.10.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597818301286
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.10.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucas Monzani & Alina Hernandez Bark & Rolf van Dick & José Peiró, 2015. "The Synergistic Effect of Prototypicality and Authenticity in the Relation Between Leaders’ Biological Gender and Their Organizational Identification," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 737-752, December.
    2. Eric Luis Uhlmann & Keith Leavitt & Jochen I. Menges & Michael Howe & Russell E. Johnson & Joel Koopman, 2012. "Getting Explicit About the Implicit: A Taxonomy of Implicit Measures and Guide for Their Use in Organizational Research," Post-Print hal-00743353, HAL.
    3. Johnson, Stefanie K. & Murphy, Susan Elaine & Zewdie, Selamawit & Reichard, Rebecca J., 2008. "The strong, sensitive type: Effects of gender stereotypes and leadership prototypes on the evaluation of male and female leaders," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 39-60, May.
    4. Heilman, Madeline E. & Eagly, Alice H., 2008. "Gender Stereotypes Are Alive, Well, and Busy Producing Workplace Discrimination," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 393-398, December.
    5. Lord, Robert G. & Dinh, Jessica E., 2014. "What Have We Learned That Is Critical in Understanding Leadership Perceptions and Leader-Performance Relations?," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 158-177, June.
    6. Ben Greiner, 2004. "The Online Recruitment System ORSEE 2.0 - A Guide for the Organization of Experiments in Economics," Working Paper Series in Economics 10, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    7. Ben Greiner, 2004. "The Online Recruitment System ORSEE - A Guide for the Organization of Experiments in Economics," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2003-10, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    8. Scott, Kristyn A. & Brown, Douglas J., 2006. "Female first, leader second? Gender bias in the encoding of leadership behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 230-242, November.
    9. Claudia Peus & Jenny Wesche & Bernhard Streicher & Susanne Braun & Dieter Frey, 2012. "Authentic Leadership: An Empirical Test of Its Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Mechanisms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 107(3), pages 331-348, May.
    10. Paul E. Green & Abba M. Krieger & Yoram Wind, 2001. "Thirty Years of Conjoint Analysis: Reflections and Prospects," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 31(3_supplem), pages 56-73, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rudic, Biljana & Hubner, Sylvia & Baum, Matthias, 2021. "Hustlers, hipsters and hackers: Potential employees’ stereotypes of entrepreneurial leaders," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 15(C).
    2. Miryam Martínez-Martínez & Manuel M. Molina-López & Ruth Mateos de Cabo & Patricia Gabaldón & Susana González-Pérez & Gregorio Izquierdo, 2021. "Awakenings: An Authentic Leadership Development Program to Break the Glass Ceiling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-23, July.
    3. Yoshie Tomozumi Nakamura & Jessica Hinshaw & Rebecca Burns, 2022. "Developing Women’s Authenticity in Leadership," Merits, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-19, November.
    4. Li, Xun & Lai, Weizheng & Wan, Qianqian & Chen, Xi, 2022. "Role of professionalism in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: Does a public health or medical background help?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    5. Hangsheng Yang & Min Tang & Ju Huang, 2023. "Can Female Executives Enhance Organizational Resilience? Evidence from China during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kyung Hwan Baik & Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Abhijit Ramalingam, 2021. "Group size and matching protocol in contests," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 1716-1736, November.
    2. Herz, Holger & Schunk, Daniel & Zehnder, Christian, 2014. "How do judgmental overconfidence and overoptimism shape innovative activity?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-23.
    3. David Macro & Jeroen Weesie, 2016. "Inequalities between Others Do Matter: Evidence from Multiplayer Dictator Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, April.
    4. M. Bigoni & D. Dragone, 2011. "An experiment on experimental instructions," Working Papers wp794, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    5. Brunner, Christoph & Hu, Audrey & Oechssler, Jörg, 2014. "Premium auctions and risk preferences: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 467-484.
    6. Topi Miettinen & Sigrid Suetens, 2008. "Communication and Guilt in a Prisoner's Dilemma," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 52(6), pages 945-960, December.
    7. Benjamin Enke & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Correlation Neglect in Belief Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 313-332.
    8. Duersch, Peter & Römer, Daniel & Roth, Benjamin, 2013. "Intertemporal stability of ambiguity preferences," Working Papers 0548, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    9. Flip Klijn & Joana Pais & Marc Vorsatz, 2013. "Preference intensities and risk aversion in school choice: a laboratory experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(1), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Blair Cleave & Nikos Nikiforakis & Robert Slonim, 2013. "Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 372-382, September.
    11. Winschel, Evguenia & Zahn, Philipp, 2012. "Effciency concern under asymmetric information," Working Papers 13-07, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    12. Belot, Michèle & Schröder, Marina, 2013. "Sloppy work, lies and theft: A novel experimental design to study counterproductive behaviour," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 233-238.
    13. Matthias Greiff & Fabian Paetzel, 2012. "The Importance of Knowing Your Own Reputation," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201236, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    14. Philippe Aghion & Ernst Fehr & Richard Holden & Tom Wilkening, 2018. "The Role of Bounded Rationality and Imperfect Information in Subgame Perfect Implementation—An Empirical Investigation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 232-274.
    15. Gary E Bolton & Axel Ockenfels & Ulrich Thonemann, 2008. "Managers and Students as Newsvendors - How Out-of-Task Experience Matters," Working Paper Series in Economics 39, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    16. Schultze, Thomas & Schulz-Hardt, Stefan, 2015. "The impact of biased information and corresponding meta-information on escalating commitment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 108-119.
    17. Billur Aksoy & Silvana Krasteva, 2020. "When does less information translate into more giving to public goods?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1148-1177, December.
    18. Hal R. Arkes & John H. Kagel & Dimitry Mezhvinsky, 2017. "Effects of a Management–Labor Context and Team Play on Ultimatum Game Outcomes," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(4), pages 993-1011, April.
    19. Siegfried K. Berninghaus & Lora R. Todorova & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "How Sensitive is Strategy Selection in Coordination Games?," FEMM Working Papers 120020, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    20. Ciril Bosch-Rosa & Thomas Meissner & Antoni Bosch-Domènech, 2018. "Cognitive bubbles," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 132-153, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:149:y:2018:i:c:p:129-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.