Cortisol and Testosterone in Leadership Practice

Helene Tronstad Moe,Hans Marius Norbom,Tom Karp,Martin Frank Strand

doi:10.3390/psych3020013

Abstract

This study sought to discover whether and how biological parameters can predict leadership behavior in the following leadership-related tasks: a face-to-face negotiation (Study 1), an individual problem-solving case (Study 2), and a group-based problem-solving case (Study 3). We replicated previous work by Mehta, Mor, Yap and Prasad in testing the dual-hormone hypothesis related to testosterone increase and cortisol decrease (Study 1), but our findings do not provide evidence to support the dual-hormone hypothesis. In Study 2, we found that high openness was a significant predictor in the individual problem-solving case. The results from Study 3 indicated that higher openness was related to a better score on the group exercise. Our findings did not support the dual-hormone model, and we did not find support for the seller-specific effect reported in Mehta et al. The original study included 64 participants with complete hormone data, while our replicational study involved 114 participants with complete hormone data.

Highlights

Can biological markers provide new perspectives on leadership performance? How can biological parameters predict leadership behavior in various leadership-related tasks?In leadership research, there is an increasing awareness of the need to integrate knowledge from the natural, biological, and social sciences in order to find new and more adequate explanations for leadership [1,2,3]
It was assumed that testosterone increase would be associated with a higher profit, given that cortisol simultaneously decreased
It was further proposed that higher testosterone levels should be associated with a smaller profit if cortisol levels increased at the same time

Summary

Introduction

Can biological markers provide new perspectives on leadership performance? There is an increasing awareness of the need to integrate knowledge from the natural, biological, and social sciences in order to find new and more adequate explanations for leadership [1,2,3]. Researchers have sought to explain leadership as a function of individual traits and charisma, and through follower-centric approaches and theories emphasizing relational factors, as well as contextual and situational perspectives, in addition to theories emphasizing shared leadership [4]. Laboratory experiments have shown that high testosterone individuals tend to exhibit better performance on cognitive tasks when appointed to leadership roles. Individuals with low testosterone tend to perform better in roles characterized by followership [5]

Methods

Results

Conclusion