Anticipating the inevitable: When leader and member attribution styles clash

Martinko, Mark J.; Moss, Sherry E.; Douglas, S.C.; Borkowski, Nancy

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.04.003

Cited by 48 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, attribution styles reflect a trait-like tendency to display attributional biases such as the actor-observer bias and the self-serving bias (Martinko, Moss, Douglas, & Borkowski, 2007). Causal attributions, of course, are shaped by both individual differences and contextual factors.…”

Section: Needs and Motivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings

Hansbrough

Lord

Schyns

2015

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2015) 'Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings.', Leadership quarterly., 26 (2). pp. 220-237. Further information on publisher's website:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua. 2014.11.006 Publisher's copyright statement: NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in The Leadership Quarterly. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A denitive version was subsequently published in The Leadership Quarterly, 26, 2, April 2015, 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014 Additional information: Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. AbstractAccurate behavioral measurement is essential to developing a science of leadership, yet accurate measurement has remained elusive. The use of follower reports of leader behavior creates challenges given that a large body of basic and applied research suggests that behavioral ratings reflect not only recall of actual behaviors, but also inferences based on semantic memory, which may vary among individuals. In this paper, we examine several explanations for rater effects that are associated with follower individual differences, contextual factors, and even research methods, such as the type of measure used, that may bias ratings of leader behavior. We also develop a conceptual model to illustrate these processes. Finally, we offer potential solutions to increase accuracy in follower reports of leader behavior. ACCURACY OF FOLLOWER LEADERSHIP RATINGS 3The leadership field relies heavily on follower ratings of leader behavior both in research settings to test leadership theories and in applied settings for leadership development purposes (e.g., 360-degree feedback). Given that leadership reflects a dynamic interaction between leaders and followers (Riggio, Chaleff, & Lipman-Blumen, 2008;Shamir, Pillai, Bligh, & Uhl-Bien, 2006), follower ratings provide an important source of data. Indeed, Shamir (2007) describes followers as "co-producers of leadership." However, reliance on follower ratings of leader behavior as a key measure of leadership processes, or even as the sole measure, creates significant challenges. In particular, followers become important contributors to the processes they are used to measure, raising both the issue of accuracy of leader ratings and the potential for biases in ratings processes that are associ...

show abstract

Section: Needs and Motivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings

Hansbrough

Lord

Schyns

2015

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While a substantial body of research has demonstrated the links between attributional explanations, attributional dimensions, expectancies, emotions, and behaviors (e.g., Green & Mitchell, 1979;Martinko, Moss, Douglas, & Borkowski, 2007;Weiner, 1986), research has also demonstrated that many individuals display attributional styles that are predictive of their future behavior (e.g., . Attribution styles are descriptions of how people are biased in their causal explanations.…”

Section: Attribution Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More specifically, several studies have demonstrated or suggested relationships between attributions or attribution styles and LMX perceptions. A study by Martinko, Moss et al (2007) demonstrated that members' attributions were related to their perceptions of LMX quality such that they were more likely to perceive poor quality LMX relationships when their leaders demonstrated pessimistic attribution styles. Similarly, research and theory on counterproductive behavior by Tripp and Bies (1996) and Douglas and Martinko (2001) indicates that aggressive behaviors such as revenge and sabotage are more likely when subordinates attribute their failures to external and stable causes such as poor supervisors.…”

Section: Leader-member Relations As a Mediatormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We believed that a substantial proportion of the variance in measures of abusive supervision would be accounted for by subordinates' attribution styles. Part of our rationale for this proposition was based on work by and Martinko, Moss et al (2007) demonstrating that attribution styles predicted the quality of leadermember relations. Given the similarity of the constructs of poor LMX relations and abusive supervision, we reasoned that attribution styles would also be predictive of abusive supervision and that LMX relations would mediate the relationship.…”

Section: Post-hoc Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Perceptions of abusive supervision: The role of subordinates' attribution styles

Martinko

Harvey

Sikora

et al. 2011

The Leadership Quarterly

Self Cite

142

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These instruments are the Occupational Attributional Style Questionnaire (OASQa; Furnham et al 1992), Occupational Attributional Style Questionnaire -Revised (OASQ-a Rev; Furnham et al 1994 Martinko et al 2007) and Member Attributional Style Questionnaire (MASQ; Martinko et al 2007). Table 1 shows a summary of the structural formats and internal reliabilities of the 15 explanatory style measures listed in this discussion.…”

Section: Evolution and Variation Of Explanatory Style Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Optimism in Organizations: Development of a Workplace Explanatory Style Questionnaire

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some researchers measure optimism by analysing explanations for hypotheti-cal scenarios in explanatory style questionnaires. The most commonly used instrument, the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ), has been shown to predict success in business, education and sport. However, these predictions were achieved by using composite scores of subscales. Our analysis of 15 measures revealed the ASQ and many other explanatory style questionnaires have low internal consistency. Furthermore, the majority of these measures use situations that have poor face validity for corporate applications, while some work-specific scenarios are only relevant to narrow domains such as selling insurance. To fulfil the need for a work-related explanatory style measure that could assess levels of optimism in any organizational setting, we developed the Workplace Explanations Survey (WES). This 5-factor measure was tested on a sample of 341 individuals working in a range of organizations and it has good internal consistency. We anticipate the WES will stimulate research into workplace optimism and provide clearer insights for optimism training, thus boosting both individual and organizational success. Abstract Some researchers measure optimism by analysing explanations for hypothetical scenarios in explanatory style questionnaires. The most commonly used instrument, the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ), has been shown to predict success in business, education and sport. However, these predictions were achieved by using composite scores of subscales. Our analysis of 15 measures revealed the ASQ and many other explanatory style questionnaires have low internal consistency. Furthermore, the majority of these measures use situations that have poor face validity for corporate applications, while some workspecific scenarios are only relevant to narrow domains such as selling insurance. To fulfil the need for a work-related explanatory style measure that could assess levels of optimism in any organizational setting, we developed the Workplace Explanations Survey (WES). This 5-factor measure was tested on a sample of 341 individuals working in a range of organizations and it has good internal consistency. We anticipate the WES will stimulate research into workplace optimism and provide clearer insights for optimism training, thus boosting both individual and organizational success.

show abstract

Anticipating the inevitable: When leader and member attribution styles clash

Cited by 48 publications

References 67 publications

Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings

Reconsidering the accuracy of follower leadership ratings

Perceptions of abusive supervision: The role of subordinates' attribution styles

Measuring Optimism in Organizations: Development of a Workplace Explanatory Style Questionnaire

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About