The Imprinting Perspective on the Origins of Leadership
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current research offers an imprinting perspective on the origins of leadership styles by investigating the imprinting of childhood social class on directive and empowering leaderships. With multi-wave and multi-source field data from 188 leaders at a health food company in Korea, we find that leaders from low childhood social class, relative to those from high childhood social class, tend to be imprinted with a stronger motivation to control organizational resources in the workplace. The motivation in turn relates positively to directive leadership – leader behaviors that maintain tight control over organizational resources by making elaborate plans for employee activities and allocations of budget and task materials as well as closely monitoring the executions of the plans –, but negatively to empowering leadership – leader behaviors that share the control of organizational resources with employees. In addition, the availability of organizational resources moderates the mediated relationships between childhood social class, motivation to control organizational resources, and leadership, such that the leader’s motivation to control organizational resources explains the relationship between childhood social class and the leadership behaviors only when the organization provided insufficient resources. Our research suggests childhood social class may have enduring effects on leadership styles by imprinting how leaders respond to organizational resource environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".