This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bass, B. M. Articles by Avolio, B. J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Potential Biases in Leadership Measures: How Prototypes, Leniency, and General Satisfaction Relate to Ratings and Rankings of Transformational and Transactional Leadership Constructs

Center for Leadership Studies, State University of New York at Binghamton

Bruce J. Avolio

Center for Leadership Studies, State University of New York at Binghamton

Eighty-seven respondents completed either a graphic rating or a forced ranking questionnaire describing their immediate superior. Five leadership scales were embedded in each questionnaire. Three represented transformational leadership constructs (charismatic leadership, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation); two reflected transactional leadership constructs (contingent reward and management-by-exception). Appended to each questionnaire were five additional scales. The items constituting these scales measured two outcomes-satisfaction with the leader and effectiveness of the leader. The remaining scales measured each participant's leadership prototype, the participant's tendency to be lenient in his/her ratings, and a general measure of satisfaction. As expected, the intercorrelations among the factor scores representing the transformational and transactional leadership constructs were reduced substantially by using the forced rankings as compared with the graphic ratings. Also, the magnitude of the relationships among leadership and outcome factor scores was reduced, on average, when using the forced rankings. Prototypicality factor scores were more highly correlated with factor scores reflecting transformational than were factor scores portraying transactional leadership. The tendency of participants to be more or less lenient in their ratings or rankings and their general level of satisfaction were of little or no consequence to the intercorrelations among the leadership and outcome factor scales.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 49, No. 3, 509-527 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/001316448904900302


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Schminke, D. Wells, J. Peyrefitte, and T. C. Sebora Leadership and Ethics in Work Groups: A Longitudinal Assessment Group Organization Management, June 1, 2002; 27(2): 272 - 293. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. E. de Vries, R. A. Roe, and T. C. B. Taillieu Need for Supervision: Its Impact on Leadership Effectiveness Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, December 1, 1998; 34(4): 486 - 501. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. L. Gardner and D. Cleavenger The Impression Management Strategies Associated with Transformational Leadership at the World-Class Level: A Psychohistorical Assessment Management Communication Quarterly, August 1, 1998; 12(1): 3 - 41. [Abstract]

				S. J. Holladay and W. T. Coombs Communicating Visions: An Exploration of the Role of Delivery in the Creation of Leader Charisma Management Communication Quarterly, May 1, 1993; 6(4): 405 - 427. [Abstract]

				L. E. Atwater and F. J. Yammarinol Personal Attributes as Predictors of Superiors' and Subordinates' Perceptions of Military Academy Leadership Human Relations, May 1, 1993; 46(5): 645 - 668. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Highhouse The Leniency Scale: Is it Really Independent of Ratee Behavior? Educational and Psychological Measurement, September 1, 1992; 52(3): 781 - 786. [Abstract]

				B. J. Avolio, F. J. Yammarino, and B. M. Bass Identifying Common Methods Variance With Data Collected From A Single Source: An Unresolved Sticky Issue Journal of Management, September 1, 1991; 17(3): 571 - 587. [Abstract] [PDF]