The Effect of Implicit Leadership Prototypes Within the Political Context
Description
In attempting to understand political outcomes, emphasis has traditionally focused on characteristics of political leaders and more recently, follower characteristics. However, individual-level implicit beliefs about what characteristics an ideal leader should possess have been largely unexamined in the political context. The present research finds that a) the implicit leadership theory (ILT) factor structure primarily discussed in business settings holds within the political context, b) that the factor structure is consistent across individual differences of party affiliation and political ideology, and c) that ILT plays a role in determining political outcomes, such that ILT mediates the relationship between political ideology and voting behavior. The current work complements and extends the current literature on ILTs into the political context, discussing and providing evidence for the implications of ILTs on voting behavior. Data were collected from 577 participants via Amazon Mechanical Turk during a two-week period before, and up to, the 2020 United States presidential election. Participation was limited to those who were 18 years of age or older, and those who were located in the United States of America. After data were screened, 18 cases were removed from the study for missing data, failed attention checks, or response bias, resulting in 559 cases that were used in the analyses. Measures include Implicit Leadership (21 items developed by Epitropaki and Martin, 2004), political affiliation and ideology (using items from the General Social Survey (GSS; Davern, et al., 1972-2022)), self-reported voting behavior for the 2020 and 2016 U.S. presidential elections, and demographic information including gender, race/color, national origin, age, employment status, and if they served in the U.S. military.
Files
Steps to reproduce
Data were collected from 577 participants via Amazon Mechanical Turk during a two-week period before, and up to, the 2020 United States presidential election. Participation was limited to those who were 18 years of age or older, and those who were located in the United States of America. After data were screened, 18 cases were removed from the study for missing data, failed attention checks, or response bias, resulting in 559 cases that were used in the analyses. Implicit leadership was measured using a set of 21 items developed by Epitropaki and Martin (2004). Participants were asked to, “Please take a moment to think about your image of a typical LEADER. Using the following scale, please indicate the degree to which you believe the trait is characteristic of a typical LEADER” for each item on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Not at all characteristic, 5= Extremely characteristic). The first three items were designed to measure the prototypical facet of Sensitivity. The next four items were designed to measure the prototypical facet of Intelligence. The next three items were designed to measure the prototypical facet of Dedication . The next three items were designed to measure the prototypical facet of Dynamism. The next 6 items were designed to measure the anti-prototypical facet of Tyranny. The last two items were designed to measure the anti-prototypical facet of Masculinity. Principal component analysis with Varimax rotation was used to test the initial survey items’ loading on six dimensions of ILT: Sensitivity, Intelligence, Dedication, Dynamism, Tyranny, and Masculinity. The criterion used in the analysis was a factor loading greater than 0.5, and Eigen values greater than 1.0 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2019). Most items loaded on their respective theorized constructs, but one item in intelligence (ILT_intelligent) and one item in dynamism (ILT_strong) were dropped since the factor loadings were less than 0.5 or loaded in multiple constructs. Political affiliation and ideology were measured using items from the General Social Survey (GSS; Davern, et al., 1972-2022). One item measuring political affiliation asked participants to report how they saw whether they thought of themselves as a Republican, Democrat, Independent, or what, on a 7-point Likert scale (1=strong democrat, 7=strong republican). Options for “other party” and “don’t know” were provided. Political ideology, the degree to which individuals consider themselves a liberal vs. conservative was measured by one item on a 7-point Likert scale (1=Extremely liberal, 7=Extremely conservative). An additional option of “I don’t know” was also provided. Participants were asked to report who they intended to vote for in the 2020 election. For the 2016 election, options included: “Trump/Pence, Clinton/Kaine, Other, I did not vote, I don’t know.” For the 2020 election, options included: “Trump/Pence, Biden/Harris, Other, I am undecided, I do not plan to vote.”