CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 254Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorSocial and Intergroup PsychologySocial Power and Status Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When the appeal of a dominant leader is greater than a prestige leader

Open access
Kakkar, Hemant, Sivanathan, Niro·2017·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1617711114PMC PMC5495227
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Across the globe we witness the rise of populist authoritarian leaders who are overbearing in their narrative, aggressive in behavior, and often exhibit questionable moral character. Drawing on evolutionary theory of leadership emergence, in which dominance and prestige are seen as dual routes to leadership, we provide a situational and psychological account for when and why dominant leaders are preferred over other respected and admired candidates. We test our hypothesis using three studies, encompassing more than 140,000 participants, across 69 countries and spanning the past two decades. We find robust support for our hypothesis that under a situational threat of economic uncertainty (as exemplified by the poverty rate, the housing vacancy rate, and the unemployment rate) people escalate their support for dominant leaders. Further, we find that this phenomenon is mediated by participants' psychological sense of a lack of personal control. Together, these results provide large-scale, globally representative evidence for the structural and psychological antecedents that increase the preference for dominant leaders over their prestigious counterparts.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1617711114

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. JT Spence, RL Helmreich, J Stapp The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A Measure of Sex Role Stereotypes and Masculinity-Femininity. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology 4, 1–42 (1974).
  2. CR Fox, G Ülkümen, Distinguishing two dimensions of uncertainty. Perspectives on Thinking, Judging, and Decision Making: A Tribute to Karl Halvor Teigen, eds W Brun, G Keren, G Kirkebøen, H Montgomery (Universitetsforlaget, Oslo), pp. 21–35 (2011).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–254 of 254

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kakkar, H., & Sivanathan, N.
Affiliations
London Business School (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2017-06-12
Volume
114
Issue
26
Pages
6734-6739
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.1617711114
PMC
PMC5495227
OpenAlex
W2626998810
Cited by
254
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12
FWCI
21.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • London Business School Research Online (London Business School) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
leadership emergence, dominance, prestige, economic uncertainty, poverty, vacant housing, unemployment, perceived personal control, political support
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Leadership, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Social Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review