Reputation concern influences perceived leadership

Abstract

Objective

Having a positive reputation generally yields more social benefits than a negative one. While individuals typically strive for a good reputation, their concern for it varies. This pre-registered study investigates how reputation concerns influence others’ social evaluations of a protagonist, particularly in the context of leadership. In this study, participants (N = 363) read profiles of individuals exhibiting either high or low concern for their reputation and rated their suitability for leadership in both competitive and cooperative settings.

Results

Results indicated that in intergroup competitive situations, individuals with low reputation concerns were more likely to be endorsed as leaders compared to those with high reputation concerns (Leadership endorsement scores: M_low = 4.00, M_high = 3.23, p < .001, η_p² = 0.09). In contrast, in intergroup cooperative situations, individuals with high reputation concerns were more likely to be endorsed as leaders (M_low = 3.30, M_high = 3.76, p < .001, η_p² = 0.04). This study extends previous research on the factors influencing leadership endorsement and provides valuable insights into how individuals are endorsed as leaders across different contexts.

Introduction

Reputation is defined as the collective beliefs, perceptions, or judgments about an individual shared within a community [1]. Having a good reputation brings social benefits [2], such as receiving prosocial treatment from others [3], being preferred as social partners [4], and attaining higher social status [5]. Conversely, negative reputations may lead to costs, including social exclusion and punishment [6]. While individuals generally strive to cultivate a positive reputation [2], which offers numerous advantages, research indicates that people vary in the degree to which they are concerned about their reputation, with some demonstrating a greater degree of concern than others [7].

However, how the degree of concern for reputation itself influences an individual’s social evaluation remains unclear. Of particular interest are leader-follower interactions—although it is well known that a leader’s reputation is essential for gaining follower support [8], how leaders’ reputation concerns influence followers’ evaluations has not been explored. This study investigates leadership endorsement, emphasizing the significance of reputation management for candidates and building upon previous research on factors affecting leadership endorsement.

Evidence from evolutionary psychology suggests that people’s decisions about whom to follow have evolved based on response to the specific contexts of intergroup competition and cooperation [9]. Aligning with this perspective, we propose that the decision to endorse a leader who values reputation versus one who does not depends on the context.

Intergroup competitive situations

Studies have suggested that in intergroup competitive contexts, individuals perceived as possessing formidability are more likely to be endorsed as leaders [10]. For instance, risk-taking behaviors, which potentially result in negative consequences, can signal the physical formidability of these actors [11], and such individuals tend to receive leadership endorsements in intergroup competitive settings [12].

Although negative reputations frequently lead to adverse outcomes [6], individuals with low concern for their reputations may not attempt to rectify these negative reputations, even if they become widespread. Therefore, we propose that individuals with low reputation concerns are more likely to be viewed as possessing the physical and psychological formidability necessary to withstand negative consequences, which, in turn, facilitates their endorsement as leaders in intergroup competitive situations.

Intergroup cooperative situations

Studies have suggested that individuals who tend to exhibit altruistic behaviors are more likely to be endorsed as leaders in intergroup cooperative situations [13]. Because individuals who place a high value on their reputation often engage in altruistic behaviors, such as cooperating with others, to build and maintain a positive reputation [2], we predict that those with strong concerns about their reputation may be more likely to receive endorsements as leaders in intergroup cooperative situations.

Together, we tested two hypotheses: first, that individuals with low reputation concerns are more likely to be endorsed as leaders in intergroup competitive contexts; and second, that individuals with high reputation concerns tend to be endorsed as leaders in intergroup cooperative situations. Additionally, we explored whether concern for reputation influences perceived dominance and prestige—two defining traits of effective leadership [14].

Main text

Methods

Participants

Participants were recruited through CrowdWorks (a crowdsourcing management company). The sample size, the experimental procedures, and the analysis method were preregistered before this study (https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.17605/OSF.IO/FX7A8). We determined the sample size based on insights garnered from our pilot study, which utilized an identical methodology to the present investigation albeit with a smaller cohort comprising 31 adults (Supplementary Information). Given the restricted participant pool in the pilot study, we conservatively adopted a small effect size of η_p² = 0.01 to ascertain the requisite sample size. Consequently, power analysis indicated that a sample size exceeding 324 participants was imperative to examine whether the interaction between reputation concern and group context significantly impacted leadership endorsement using ANOVA (α = 0.05, 1-β = 0.95). Accounting for potential exclusions, we recruited 385 participants. The final sample comprised 363 individuals (183 males, 174 females, 1 non-binary respondent, and 5 participants who declined to disclose their gender; M_age = 41.42, SD = 9.48, age range = 22–72). The correlation coefficient between the population distribution of each Japanese city and the study participants was 0.920, indicating a close match. This suggested that the study’s findings were likely representative of the broader Japanese population. Twenty-two participants were excluded because they failed the attention-check questions. Before engaging in our research, participants were presented with an informed consent form and were required to affirm their willingness to participate by clicking an “agree” button. Our survey protocol received approval from the Ethics Committee of the Department of Cognitive and Psychological Sciences at Nagoya University (No. 2404011-C-03-3) and was conducted following the American Psychological Association ethical standards (2017) and the Declaration of Helsinki (2001).

Procedure

Based on the Concern for Reputation Scale developed by De Cremer & Tyler [15], we developed four profiles delineating characteristics of the target individuals (Table 1; see also the Supplementary Information): two profiles delineated individuals exhibiting a pronounced preoccupation with their reputation (High Reputation Concern condition), while the remaining two depicted individuals demonstrating a lesser regard for their reputation (Low Reputation Concern condition). Participants were randomly assigned to one of the individuals; the number of participants for each individual/condition was balanced. Initially, participants read a profile furnishing details about the target individuals, forming impressions thereof. Subsequently, participants engaged in three blocks of questioning about leadership endorsement, dominance, and prestige. The sequence of these blocks was counterbalanced across participants. After this phase, participants underwent two manipulation checks: one gauging the efficacy of the reputation-concern manipulation and the other assessing the contextual manipulation.

Table 1 Structures of profiles in the current study

Fig. 1

Context-based leadership endorsement of high and low reputation-concerned individuals. Note: Error bars indicate standard errors

Measures

Leadership endorsement

We measured participants’ context-based leadership endorsement using scenarios from van Kleef et al. (Supplementary Information; [12]). Participants expressed their support for the target individual across five leadership positions: political party leader, sports team captain, real estate association representative, CEO of a large oil company, and representative of an animal welfare organization. They evaluated their endorsement for each role in both cooperative and competitive intergroup contexts using a 7-point scale.

Manipulation checks

To assess the effectiveness of the manipulations regarding the target individual’s concern for reputation, we used a seven-item scale developed by De Cremer & Tyler [15], employing a 7-point rating scale (Supplementary Information). The scale demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s α coefficient of 0.98.

Furthermore, we utilized a context manipulation check developed by van Kleef et al. (Experiment 3; [12]) to assess the manipulation of context. Participants rated the extent to which each combination of leadership roles and contexts depicted a cooperative versus competitive scenario on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly competitive) to 7 (strongly cooperative). The Cronbach’s α coefficient for this assessment was 0.85, suggesting good internal consistency.

Dominance and prestige

We assessed perceived dominance and prestige for exploratory purposes. Detailed methods and results are provided in the Supplementary Information because of the word limitations of the main text.

Results

Manipulation checks

The analytical method used for the manipulation checks was consistent with that employed in the previous study (non-pre-registered) [12]. Individuals in the High Reputation Concern condition (M = 5.98, SD = 0.74) were perceived as significantly more concerned about their reputation compared to those in the Low Reputation Concern condition (M = 1.94, SD = 0.89; t (361) = 47.11, p < .001, d = 4.95), confirming the effectiveness of the reputation concern manipulation.

To assess the impact of the contextual leadership manipulation, we employed a linear mixed-effects model that included random intercepts for participant identities, leader roles, age, sex, and target individual names (Hikaru vs. Natsuki), random slopes for contexts by participants and leader roles by context, and a fixed effect for contexts (intergroup cooperative vs. competitive). A significant main effect of context was observed (β = 1.15, t (1.86) = 21.91, p = .003). Intergroup cooperative contexts (M = 5.29, SD = 1.01) were perceived as significantly more cooperative than intergroup competitive contexts (M = 2.48, SD = 1.24). Therefore, the context manipulation was deemed successful.

Leadership endorsement

Here, we report the results of an ANCOVA instead of the pre-registered mixed ANOVA to test the effects of several covariates (the covariates were included based on the reviewers’ suggestions). To examine whether reputation concerns influence leadership endorsement in both intergroup competitive and cooperative settings, we conducted an ANCOVA with one between-participants factor (Condition: high or low reputation concerns), one within-participants factor (Contexts: competitive or cooperative intergroup situations), and three covariates (sex, age, and target individual names). No significant effects were found for age, sex, or target individual names (ps > 0.05). We did not observe significant main effects for condition (F (1, 347) = 1.45, p = .23, η_p² = 0.004) or context (F (1, 347) = 2.37, p = .12, η_p² = 0.007). However, a significant interaction between condition and context was identified (F (1, 347) = 76.36, p < .001, η_p² = 0.18).

Further main effect analyses revealed that participants endorsed individuals with low reputation concerns as leaders more frequently than those with high reputation concerns in intergroup competitive situations (M_low = 4.00, M_high = 3.23; F (1, 351) = 32.80, p < .001, η_p² = 0.09; Fig. 1). In intergroup cooperative situations, participants endorsed individuals with high reputation concerns as leaders more frequently than those with low reputation concerns (M_low = 3.30, M_high = 3.76; F (1, 351) = 14.74, p < .001, η_p² = 0.04; Fig. 1).

The results were obtained using different analyses (i.e., a non-pre-registered linear mixed-effects model), suggesting their robustness (see Supplementary Information).

Discussion

This study showed that people consider both the extent of an individual’s reputational concerns and the social context when endorsing them as leaders. The findings expand on previous research regarding the factors that influence leadership endorsement across different contexts [9, 12, 13, 16] and highlight the significant role that reputation management plays in securing leader endorsement. While previous research has suggested that individuals who have the ability to influence others by providing valuable resources or punishment tend to care less about their reputation [17], our findings indicate that neglecting one’s reputation can lead to a loss of public support and undermine one’s position in certain situations (i.e., cooperative situations).

From a practical standpoint, it is crucial that prospective leaders do not overlook their reputations but instead engage in careful and strategic reputation management. Specifically, it has been suggested that concern for one’s reputation, coupled with the ability to adapt one’s approach in response to changing social contexts, is critical for gaining leadership endorsement. Proper reputation management, aligned with organizational and social expectations, will ultimately enhance a leader’s credibility and influence.

Limitation

This study has several potential limitations, which may lead to further research. First, it is not clear whether our findings reflect a universal phenomenon across cultures. Concern for reputation is linked to prevention focus [7], which is more prevalent in Eastern cultures, while promotion focus is more common in Western cultures [18]. This suggests that individuals in Eastern cultures may be positively evaluated for being reputation-conscious, whereas those in Western cultures may be favored if they are less concerned about their reputation. These cultural differences in reputation may affect leadership endorsement, warranting further investigation in both contexts.

Second, the reason why individual differences in reputation concerns affect leadership perceptions differently in competitive and cooperative intergroup contexts still needs clarification. This could be achieved by testing the effect of potential mediating variables. For example, whether individuals who are indifferent to their reputation are perceived as formidable could be tested by investigating whether people overestimate their body size [11].