When Toughness Begets Respect: Dominant Individuals Gain Prestige and Leadership By Facilitating Intragroup Conflict Resolution

Abstract

Objective

Why do dominant leaders rise to power via the popular vote? This research tests whether when people feel threatened by intra-group disorder they desire stronger, more dominant leaders.

Methods

Participants (N = 1,026) read a vignette that depicts a within-group norm violation. We then used a between-subjects design to randomly assign participants to a specific version of the vignette in which (a) a focal target individual in the scenario varied in their dominance (punitiveness: from no to moderate to strong); and (b) the local group faced little or substantial intra-group conflict and disorder (threat: from low to high). Following this, participants reported how much they endorse the target individuals as leader and the individual’s perceived prestige.

Results

We find that intra-group conflict motivates a psychology that favors the rise of dominant leaders: Highly punitive individuals (seen as highly dominant) are endorsed as leaders when in-group threat is high, but comparably disfavored when threat is low. Under low threat, non-punitive individuals (who are seen as less dominant) are endorsed as leaders. Subsequent analyses reveal that these shifts in leader preferences are explained by corresponding changes in prestige. Under conditions of high threat, dominance confers prestige, whereas under low threat, dominance suppresses prestige. Tests of mediation further show that the effect of dominance on increased leader support under high threat is mediated by prestige.

Conclusions

In contexts of threat, such as internal disorder, dominant leaders are favored and gain prestige, owing to their perceived ability to supply benefits such as in mediating internal conflicts.