When controversial leaders with charisma are effective: the influence of terror on the need for vision and impact of mixed attitudinal messages

Abstract

We investigated the idea that a charismatic leader with a controversial message is most likely to persuade people in times of terror, because in those times people have a high need for vision, and vision is what a charismatic leader provides. In addition, we argued that the leader's message should contain a pro-attitudinal position as well, as this makes the counter-attitudinal message more palatable. In line with our hypotheses, we found in Experiment 1 that thinking about terrorism increases people's need for vision. Experiment 2 revealed that only when people have a high need for vision they will be influenced by a controversial charismatic leader. Experiment 3 showed that existential threats also directly increase the influence of a controversial charismatic leader. Further, this was especially so when the charismatic leader was both attractive and communicated his message in a charismatic way. Finally, Experiment 4 revealed that after thinking about their own death or about terrorist attacks, people were most likely to be persuaded by a controversial charismatic leader whose counterattitudinal message also contained pro-attitudinal statements. Together, this research suggests that in times of terror people's need for vision increases, which opens them up to a counter-attitudinal message of a charismatic leader as long as this message also includes some pro-attitudinal statements. Copyright # 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. In this paper we investigate under what circumstances charismatic leaders with controversial ideas are most likely to be effective in changing the attitudes and behaviors of their audience. We argue that in times of terror, people have a high need for vision which opens them up to the influence of a charismatic

Field Experiments in Organizations

“…However, individuals are rarely assigned to course sections or departments at random, rendering them quasi-experiments. Sometimes authors fail to state how they assigned participants to conditions (Earley & Lind 1987, Gordijn & Stapel 2008, Scandura & Graen 1984, Thibaut et al 1974. When random assignment is not specified, assume the research was quasi-experimental.…”

The Use of Structures in Communication Networks to Track Membership in Terrorist Groups

“…While this may not always be the case, researchers such as Takkala (2005), and Varden (2011) argue that powerful leaders in terrorist networks (as opposed to the heads of leaders of other organizations or organized crime, e.g., Mafia, Cosa Nostra, Hell's Angels) tend to be charismatic individuals, since they have to convince other members of the organization to participate in attacks that can be lethal for their own selves, something not likely achieved by force. As Gordijn and Stapel (2008) remark, charismatic leaders with a controversial message are most likely to convince (certain) people to joining their group. Sociologist Max Weber (1922) distinguishes between legal, traditional, and charismatic authority.…”