Abstract
Sixteen groups of male and female university students (N= 129) were tested in a 2 by 2 design which varied mode of leader selection (election vs. appointment) and desirability of leader role (desirable vs. undersiable). Desirable leader roles were created by offering $5.00 and extra experimental credit for extra work to be completed on the leader's own time. Leaders in undersirable roles had to complete the extra work without pay or experimental credit. After a warm-up task, a confederate was either elected or appointed leader. On two subsequent tasks the leader made three influence attempts on (a) the task structure, (b) the task content, and (c) the members' willingness to volunteer to help the leader with the extra work. Results indicated that on all influence measures individuals elected to the undersirable leader role had significantly greater social power than individuals elected to the desirable role. Desirability of the leader role did not significantly affect the social power of appointed leaders.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
