IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v63y2026i3p1264-1302.html

Lay Theories of Expertise: A Mixed‐Methods Exploration

Author

Listed:
  • Lauren A. Keating
  • Benjamin W. Walker

Abstract

Failure to engage with expertise underpins many organizational and societal problems. Despite decades of research on expertise, we still do not fully understand why such failures persist, and there is a sense that these failures are becoming a crisis of expertise. In this article, we highlight a person's system of beliefs about the meaning of expertise – what we term their lay theory of expertise (LTE) – as an important factor for understanding their engagement with expertise. Through a free response study (Study 1), analysis of social media data (Study 2), and word sorting study (Study 3), we first develop a taxonomy of common LTE elements. We then examine how LTEs affect expert recognition via two experiments with managers (Studies 4 and 5). Study 4 reveals that congruence between the most psychologically active element of a person's lay theory and expert conduct is conducive to expert recognition, while Study 5 highlights that (in)congruence between LTEs and expert conduct can alter how other mental representations (such as gender stereotypes) shape expert recognition. Our work provides a conceptual foundation for exploring variation in the subjective meaning of expertise in future research on expert recognition and engagement, both within and beyond organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauren A. Keating & Benjamin W. Walker, 2026. "Lay Theories of Expertise: A Mixed‐Methods Exploration," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 1264-1302, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:63:y:2026:i:3:p:1264-1302
    DOI: 10.1111/joms.13188
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13188
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joms.13188?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jomstd:v:63:y:2026:i:3:p:1264-1302. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    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.