Do messages that evoke a gendered leadership style affect attitudes toward well-known candidates? If so, among what sorts of voters? I show that voters’ evaluations of national politicians, including Hillary Clinton, can be influenced by presenting candidates as stereotypically masculine or feminine leaders. In two survey experiments of California registered voters (n = 1,800 each) conducted at the height of the 2016 presidential election campaign, I find that, on average, voters seemed to prefer both male and female politicians more when they were described as having feminine leadership styles. However, clear heterogeneous treatment effects occurred: Democrats, liberals, and women from all parties evaluated politicians more favorably when they were described as feminine; Republicans, conservatives, and voters for Donald Trump evaluated the same candidates less favorably when described as feminine. The findings have implications for scholarship that links gender stereotyping, partisanship, and ideology to voter behavior.

This study examines whether a responsible downsizing strategy and employee-oriented leadership are complementary in strengthening firm performance after downsizing. This study investigated 154 firms that have used an organizational downsizing strategy with surveys and follow-up focus groups. Results of both the empirical evidence and qualitative data demonstrates that for firms adopting an employee-oriented leadership style, the level of responsible downsizing strategy is high and firm performance is significantly increased. Specifically, the results of the focus groups indicate that a responsible downsizing strategy deepens the loyalty and faith of employees to their employer. These theoretical and practical implications are also discussed.

With the recent resurgence in popularity of trait theories of leadership, it is timely to consider the genetic determination of the multiple factors comprising the leadership construct. Individual differences in personality traits have been found to be moderately to highly heritable, and so it follows that if there are reliable personality trait differences between leaders and non-leaders, then there may be a heritable component to these individual differences. Despite this connection between leadership and personality traits, however, there are no studies of the genetic basis of leadership using modern behavior genetic methodology. The present study proposes to address the lack of research in this area by examining the heritability of leadership style, as measured by self-report psychometric inventories. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), the Leadership Ability Evaluation, and the Adjective Checklist were completed by 247 adult twin pairs (183 monozygotic and 64 same-sex dizygotic). Results indicated that most of the leadership dimensions examined in this study are heritable, as are two higher level factors (resembling transactional and transformational leadership)derived from anobliquely rotated principal components factors analysis of the MLQ. Univariate analyses suggested that 48% of the variance in transactional leadership may be explained by additive heritability, and 59% of the variance in transformational leadership may be explained by non-additive (dominance) heritability. Multi-variate analyses indicatedthat most ofthe variables studiedshared substantial genetic covariance, suggesting a large overlap in the underlying genes responsible for the leadership dimensions.