The Presidential Performance Study: A Progress Report

Murray, Robert K.; Blessing, Tim H.

doi:10.2307/1903482

Cited by 67 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For this common database, the Maranell (1970) and the Murray and Blessing (1983) Using the selected common database in = 29), I used stepwise regression (e.g., Cohen &Cohen, 1975;Darlington, 1972;Myers, 1979) When the variables in the situational pool were selected stepwise with the Maranell (1970) ratings as the criterion, the following formula resulted:…”

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Term length added an increment of 9.0%, F(l, 22) = 22.99, p < .001, to raise the total variance accounted for in greatness by the six-variable equation to 91.4% (adjusted R 2 = .89). The addition of length of term to the Murray and Blessing (1983) The overall equation accounted for 93.8% (adjusted R 2 = .92) of the variance in greatness, F(7, 21) = 45.46, p < .001. IQ accounted for 44.9% of the variance, F(l, 27) = 21.98, p< .001.…”

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one small interaction surfaced: Attractiveness interacted with order in the six-variable and seven-variable personological-situational equations with the Maranell (1970) criterion but accounted for additional increments of only 1.6% and 1.3% to the variance accounted for in greatness. This may be related to the fact that attractiveness was one of the few variables that correlated with order in Simonton's Murray and Blessing (1983) ratings as the criterion. " The scores predicted from the Simonton 5-variable and 6-variable equations were computed using Simonton's operational definitions of the predictors, as provided during the review process.…”

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sim5 and Sim6 refer to the Simonton 5-variable (1986a) and6-variable (1986b) equations. MBPS7 refers to the 7-variable personological-situational equation developed with the Murray and Blessing (1983) ratings as the criterion. a The scores predicted from the Simonton 5-variable and 6-variable equations were computed using Simonton's operational definitions of the predictors, as provided during the review process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Alternative formulas to predict the greatness of U.S. presidents: Personological, situational, and zeitgeist factors.

McCann¹

1992

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formulas to predict presidential greatness on the Maranell index were constructed for 29 presidents from Washington to L. Johnson. When a Zeitgeist variable, derived from the historian A. M. Schlesinger, Jr.'s (1986) work on the public purpose-private interest cycle of American political history, served as the initial predictor and stepwise selection was made from a personological pool and then from a situational pool, a 6-variable formula containing S personological variables accounted for 91% of the greatness variance. With free stepwise regression, years served and 6 personological predictors accounted for 94% of the greatness variance. Contrary to Simonton's (1987) attributional interpretation, a dispositional basis for presidential greatness may exist. The results also suggest that public purpose phases bring forth presidents who exhibit the personological characteristics most related to historians' acclaim for presidential leadership.What characteristics define successful leaders? What constitutes successful leadership? Because the answers are clearly of theoretical and practical importance to contexts ranging from immediate interpersonal relationships to the arena of global politics, it is not surprising that social psychologists and scholars from other disciplines have spent considerable time and energy trying to delineate the characteristics and disentangle the dynamics of successful leadership. The American presidency is a rich source of material for researching leadership in the political domain. An enormous fund of both qualitative and quantitative data is continually accumulated, and the number of presidents who have now served permits opportunities to apply relatively sophisticated quantitative and statistical strategies and techniques to the information.One line of political leadership research has focused on the relative "greatness" of the presidents. The presidents have been formally assessed several times since 1948 by groups of experts (e.g.,

show abstract

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Procedures and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Alternative formulas to predict the greatness of U.S. presidents: Personological, situational, and zeitgeist factors.

McCann¹

1992

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These measure range from simple one-dimensional ranking of presidents by a panel of experts such as the Schlessinger poll from 1962 and the Murray and Blessing (1983) measure to rankings by panels of experts based on multiple dimension (up to 10) such as one developed by Winter (1987), by Smith and colleagues (2000) and the C-Span ranking from 2009…”

Section: Presidential Greatnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivation in Words: Promotion- and Prevention-Oriented Leader Communication in Times of Crisis

Stam¹,

Knippenberg

Wisse

et al. 2016

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. MOTIVATION IN WORDS: PROMOTION-AND PREVENTION-ORIENTED LEADER COMMUNICATION IN TIMES OF CRISISWhen during the 2008 US presidential elections a financial crisis erupted, the US people overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama, the candidate who had adopted the slogan "change we can believe in" and who emphasized hope and optimism when he addressed the people. In line with this example, research demonstrates that situational uncertainty or crisis strongly influences the endorsement of the more charismatic or decisive leadership styles and that inspirational communication is at the heart of these styles (see Bligh clear what leaders should communicate in order to be endorsed in difficult times. We argue that regulatory focus (Higgins, 1987(Higgins, , 1997 of leader communication, which we refer to as regulatory orientation, is an important determinant of leadership endorsement during crisis.,Studies on the role of regulatory focus in leadership mostly seem to focus on regulatory fit effects (Avnet & Higgins, 2006;Cesario, Grant, & Higgins, 2004). Regulatory fit theory posits that persons who's regulatory focus is sustained by the environment, will be experiencing a situation of "feeling right". If individuals feel right they become more persuaded, more motivated, more engaged and their evaluations of the elements that sustain their regulatory focus intensify. Hence, followers may perceive a leader as effective and motivating when the regulatory orientation of the leader's communication fits followers' regulatory focus (cf. Stam, van Knippenberg & Wisse, 2010a). Based on this argument, some researchers have speculated that leaders who use prevention-oriented communication may be especially endorsed in times of crisis because the negative affect and uncertainty associated with crisis induce a prevention focus in MOTIVATION IN WORDS 3 followers and prevention-oriented leader communication sustains a prevention focus (cf. Bruch, Shamir, & Eilam-Shamir, 2007;Stam et al., 2010a).In the current research we challenge this idea. We acknowledge that the uncertainty and negative feelings engendered by crises may induce a prevention focus in individuals, but based he regulatory focus literature (e.g., Hamstra, Sassenberg, van Yperen, & Wisse, 2013;Johnson, Smith, Wallace, Hill, & Baron, 2015) we argue that fit caused by prevention-oriented communication during crisis serves to intensify the uncertainty and negative feelings related to the crisis. This will lead to less motivation to realize the...

show abstract

Bibliography

2011

A Companion to Richard M. Nixon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Presidential Performance Study: A Progress Report

Cited by 67 publications

References 0 publications

Alternative formulas to predict the greatness of U.S. presidents: Personological, situational, and zeitgeist factors.

Alternative formulas to predict the greatness of U.S. presidents: Personological, situational, and zeitgeist factors.

Motivation in Words: Promotion- and Prevention-Oriented Leader Communication in Times of Crisis

Bibliography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About