The social identity theory of leadership: Theoretical origins, research findings, and conceptual developments
By M. Hogg, D. van Knippenberg, David E. Rast. 2012
394 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Gender Studies, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b222773fc3c4a4c55c17cae3fc7f4d4ce3a363da
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Gender Studies
In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- Leadership as social identity management: Introducing the Identity Leadership Inventory (ILI) to assess and validate a four-dimensional model (2014, background): “As several recent reviews (Bartel & Wiesenfeld, 2013; Hogg et al., 2012; van Knippenberg, 2011) have pointed out, it is a mistake to equate leader prototypicality simply with being maximally similar to other group members or with being an average group member.”
- Servant leadership and employee outcomes: the moderating role of subordinates’ motives (2016, result): “This is in line with research evidence on the role of leader prototype in important outcomes such as their evaluations of their leaders’ effectiveness (Hogg et al., 2012).”
- RETRACTED: The effect of servant leadership on group collective organizational deviance-mediating effect of team egoism (2021, background): “14 When service-oriented leaders show clear altruism in front of team members and emphasize the common interests of the organization, team members will regard this as an important feature of the team, and focus on the interests of others and other teams as a part of self-regulation.”
- Leadership and followership identity processes: A multilevel review ☆ (2017, background): “…inclusive rhetoric and strategic communication that talks up their own prototypicality or talk down non-prototypical behavior, vilifying contenders of leadership and casting them as nonprototypical or identifying comparison out-groups (e.g., Hogg et al., 2012; Merritt, Effron, & Monin, 2010).”
- Evaluation of and support for group prototypical leaders: a meta-analysis of twenty years of empirical research (2017, background): “Together, group-based trust and liking enhance perceptions of the performance and effectiveness of more prototypical leaders (Hogg et al., 2012a; Rast, Gaffney, Hogg, & Crisp, 2012; Rast, Hogg, & Giessner, 2013) and allow such leaders to weather poor performance or even failure (Giessner & Van…”
- Advancing the social identity theory of leadership: A meta-analytic review of leader group prototypicality (2020, methodology): “Although these moderation effects have been summarized in narrative reviews (e.g., Hogg et al., 2012), they have not been subjected to a meta-analytic examination.”
- Uncertain Self in a Changing World: A Foundation for Radicalisation, Populism, and Autocratic Leadership (2020, methodology): “According to the social identity theory of leadership (e.g. Hogg, 2001; Hogg & Van Knippenberg, 2003; Hogg et al., 2012), people in groups, particularly groups they consider important and central to who they are, turn to and are more influenced by leaders they consider highly prototypical group…”
- Anonymity as an instructional scaffold in peer assessment: its effects on peer feedback quality and evolution in students’ perceptions about peer assessment skills (2018, background): “More specifically, SIT proposes that a person with a more well-received social identity and greater charisma would be perceived as a more reliable source of normative information (e.g., peer feedback) and thus have more influence over the behavior of other group members (Hogg et al. 2012).”