Dominance, sex, and leader emergence

Hegstrom, Jane L.; Griffith, W. I.

doi:10.1007/bf00289925

Cited by 21 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our examination of studies published subsequent to the meta-analysis suggests that men's leadership advantage still predominates (Dobbins, Long, Dedrick, & Clemons, 1990; R. J. Hall et al, 1998;Hegstrom & Griffith, 1992;Malloy & Janowski, 1992;Sapp, Harrod, & Zhao, 1996;Walker et al, 1996), although three studies showed no sex difference (Kolb, 1997(Kolb, , 1999Moss & Kent, 1996) and one produced a difference in favor of women (Kent & Moss, 1994).…”

Section: Studies Of the Emergence Of Leadersmentioning

confidence: 88%

Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Eagly¹,

Karau²

2002

Psychological Review

4,775

257

5,712

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders proposes that perceived incongruity between the female gender role and leadership roles leads to 2 forms of prejudice: (a) perceiving women less favorably than men as potential occupants of leadership roles and (b) evaluating behavior that fulfills the prescriptions of a leader role less favorably when it is enacted by a woman. One consequence is that attitudes are less positive toward female than male leaders and potential leaders. Other consequences are that it is more difficult for women to become leaders and to achieve success in leadership roles. Evidence from varied research paradigms substantiates that these consequences occur, especially in situations that heighten perceptions of incongruity between the female gender role and leadership roles. Role Congruity Theory: How Gender Roles and LeaderRoles Produce Two Types of PrejudiceIn general, prejudice can arise from the relations that people perceive between the characteristics of members of a social group

show abstract

Section: Studies Of the Emergence Of Leadersmentioning

confidence: 88%

Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Eagly¹,

Karau²

2002

Psychological Review

4,775

257

5,712

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In interpersonal interactions, women are less competitive, behave less dominantly, emerge less often as leaders of groups, and are less motivated to lead than men are [17][18][19][20]. In a related vein, women have a preference for interpersonal interactions and relationships to be organized in a democratic way with flat hierarchies whereas men prefer inequality in dominance among group members [21,22].…”

Section: Gender and Dominancementioning

confidence: 93%

Dominance and gender in the physician-patient interaction

Mast¹

2004

The Journal of Men's Health & Gender

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this review is to show that physician-patient interactions differ in the degree of dominance asymmetry between the physician and the patient, that physician's dominance behavior is related to negative patient outcomes, and that physician gender affects how physician dominance is perceived by patients. The article provides (1) an overview of existing findings on dominance in the physician-patient interaction, (2) a summary of gender differences in dominance with an emphasis on the physician-patient interaction, and (3) an explanation on why it might be more important for women doctors than for men doctors to adhere to a non-dominant interaction style. ß 2004 WPMH GmbH. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.The physician-patient interaction is inherently hierarchic in many different ways. First, the physician generally has more medical knowledge or expertise than the patient. The help-seeking position per se is one of low power, characterized by a lack of resources (e.g. information, physical integrity) and often accompanied by anxiety and uncertainty about prognosis and treatment and by discomfort or pain. Also in terms of social standing, most physician-patient interactions are encounters among unequals: The physician usually has higher socioeconomic status than the patient. Moreover, a physician can behave more or less dominantly during the medical visit and therefore either enhance or attenuate existing dominance differences between him/her and the patient. The present article focuses on the latter, the dominance asymmetry in the physician-patient interaction as it occurs during the medical visit through physician behavior.To clarify the terms, dominance is understood as having or striving for control or influence over another or as having privileged access to restricted resources. This broad definition encompasses status and power. Hierarchy is defined as dominance differences among people. Dominance in the physician-patient interactionAlthough the topic of dominance in the physician-patient interaction has been addressed in a theoretical way by many researchers [1-4], not much empirical evidence has been gathered to date. Roter and Hall [3] introduced a model of the physician-patient relationship based on high or low physician and patient power. They call a physician-patient relationship paternalistic if the physician's power is high and the patient's power is low. The physician sets the goals of the visit and the agenda, makes all the decisions and has more control over the interaction than the patient. Patient's values and preferences for treatment are not explored and the physician's role is the one of a guardian. This is the traditional form of the doctor-patient relationship, based on a biomedical understanding of medicine and health care. However, not all physician-patient relationships are characterized by such a pronounced power asymmetry in favor of the physician. The reverse of this relationship is the consumerist relationship in which the patient has high power and the physician has low pow...

show abstract

“…In interactions, men behave more dominantly than women, are more competitive, are more motivated to become leaders, and actually emerge more often as leaders (Eagly et al 1994;Golub and Maxwell Canty 1982;Hegelstrom and Griffith 1992;Megargee 1969). Male leaders also behave more dominantly than female leaders (Eagly and Johnson 1990) and men use more direct techniques of influence than women (Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, and Kaukiainen 1992).…”

Section: Gendermentioning

confidence: 99%

20 Power, dominance, and persuasion

Mast¹,

Cousin²

2013

Nonverbal Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"When two persons interact, they continually negotiate two major relationship issues: how friendly or hostile they will be with each other, and how much in charge or control each will be during their transactions" (Kiesler and Auerbach 2003: 1712). Social interactions can be mapped onto two main dimensions that are perpendicular to each other: the affiliation dimension -also called the horizontal dimension (Hall, Coats, and Smith LeBeau 2005), which is characterized by friendliness and warmth on the one end of the dimension and by hostility and aggression on the other end; and the control dimension -also called the vertical dimension -which relates to differences in power, dominance, and influence among two or more social interaction partners (Kiesler and Auerbach 2003;Moskowitz 1993;Tiedens and Jimenez 2003;Wiggins 1979).The vertical dimension of social interactions is present in nearly every social context. We live in a hierarchically organized society in which a member of the parliament is considered a higher status person than a janitor. We are confronted with hierarchies at our workplace when interacting with superiors, peers, and subordinates. Even among friends and family members the power dimension often plays a role. Not all hierarchies are explicit such as they appear in a company's organizational chart. Many hierarchies are more subtle, for instance as when an individual succeeds in convincing his or her group of friends to go watch a particular movie.The vertical or hierarchy dimension affects how we relate to others and it thus greatly impacts on real world outcomes. As an example, the status difference between an airplane captain and the other cockpit members (first officers and flight engineers) can entail ineffective communication leading to human error and ultimately to catastrophe. When an airplane crashes because the higher power position of the captain does not encourage the crew members to voice 2 their concerns or observations about flight irregularities, the hierarchical relationship can contribute to disaster.To maximize effective communication among members possessing different levels of power or status, not only the verbal content of a message is important but also the way the information is conveyed nonverbally plays a role. In the present chapter, we will focus on how the vertical dimension is linked to nonverbal behavior. We will review the expressed nonverbal behavior of people who differ on the vertical dimension and the perception of verticality based on the observation of people's nonverbal behavior. We will also discuss whether people are accurate in judging others' power and dominance. We will present the nonverbal behaviors that are associated with persuasion and we will talk about how nonverbal dominance affects interpersonal relationships and interactions. Finally, we will review individual characteristics that have been shown to moderate the expression or perception of power and dominance. Definition of the terms used to describe the vertical dimensionWe focus on the interp...

show abstract

Dominance, sex, and leader emergence

Cited by 21 publications

References 24 publications

Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.

Dominance and gender in the physician-patient interaction

20 Power, dominance, and persuasion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About