Abstract
Two experiments (NS = 48 and 52 male college students, respectively) are reported on the relative influence of appointed or elected leaders and members if four-man discussion groups in a decision-making task. Leaders were either appointed by the E or elected by the group, and groups received either success or failure feedback. The influence of elected leaders increased after failure feedback and decreased after success feedback, which was precisely opposite to the direction of influence shift for appointed leaders. The second experiment examined this effect further, after leaders were replaced by appointment or election, and with the identical success or failure feedback as before. The hypothesis that the newly elected leader would be more influential than the newly appointed leader was only partially supported. The elected leader who succeeded the initial leader was found to have had significantly higher influence than the average group member from the very outset.
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.
