The DOI matches its Crossref record; 161 of the 161 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality
Abstract
This research advances a social identity approach to leadership through a meta-analysis examining four novel hypotheses that clarify the nature and impact of leader group prototypicality (the extent to which a leader is perceived to embody shared social identity). A random-effects meta-analysis ( k = 128, N = 32,834) reveals a moderate-to-large effect of prototypicality that holds across evaluative and behavioral outcomes. The effect is stronger (a) when prototypicality is conceptualized as the ideal-type rather than the average group member, (b) for stronger prototypes (indexed by group longevity), and (c) for group members in formal rather than nonformal leadership roles. The effect is not contingent on group prototypicality entailing differentiation from other (out)groups. Additionally, results provide meta-analytic evidence of widely examined key factors: follower group identification (which enhances the relationship) and leader group-serving behavior (which attenuates the relationship). Building on these findings, we outline the implications for the next wave of theoretical and empirical work.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales
Cohen, J. (1960) · Educational and Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/001316446002000104 · Cited by 42,398
Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package
Viechtbauer, W. (2010) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03 · Cited by 20,464
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
The Social psychology of intergroup relations
Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,577
(2000) · Cited by 9,198
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self‐Categorization Theory
REID, F. (1987) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00799.x · Cited by 8,091
Metadata
- Authors
- Steffens, N. K., Munt, K. A., van Knippenberg, D., Platow, M. J., & Haslam, S. A.
- Venue
- Organizational Psychology Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-10-15
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 35-72
- ISSN
- 2041-3866 (ISSN-L)
- 2041-3874
- OpenAlex
- W3092851869
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 161
- FWCI
- 32.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/2041386620962569
- The paper
- Steffens, N. K., Munt, K. A., van Knippenberg, D., Platow, M. J., & Haslam, S. A. (2021). Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality. Organizational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386620962569
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
