I am one of you! Team prototypicality as a facilitator for female leaders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the present study, we complement role congruity theory with insights from the Social Identity Model of Leadership. We propose that especially female leaders benefit from team prototypicality, i.e., being representative of the group they are leading. We assume that team prototypicality shifts the comparative frame away from higher-order categories like gender and leader roles to more concrete team-related properties and thereby reduces disadvantages for female leader that stem from the incongruity between the leader role and the female gender role stereotypes. Further, this effect should affect both (female) leaders themselves and their perception by their followers. Building on previous research, we predict, first, lower authentic leadership behavior for female than male leaders. Second, that team prototypicality positively relates to authentic leadership and trust in leader. Third, that team prototypicality has stronger relations to authentic leadership and trust in leader for female compared to male leaders. We tested assumptions in a randomized online experiment (Study 1, N = 315) and a cross-sectional survey study (Study 2, N = 300). We did not find consistent support for the assumed gender differences in authentic leadership. But our results (both in manifest and in latent analyses) show that team prototypicality—both self-perceived (Study 1) and as perceived by employees (Study 2)—is related to more authentic leadership and more trust in leader (Study 2) and that these relations are stronger for female than for male leaders. Furthermore, we tested in Study 2 an extended model including follower’s job satisfaction as the final follower outcome affected via team prototypicality, leader gender, authentic leadership, and trust in leader. Thereby, we found that team prototypicality has direct and indirect effects on job satisfaction as carried through authentic leadership and trust in leader, respectively. Together, the results of both studies support our assumptions and show that female leaders can reduce role incongruity barriers through high team prototypicality. Implications for future research and practical implications of these results for gender equality are discussed.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".