Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections

Catarina Morais; Dominic Abrams; Georgina Randsley de Moura

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089

Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections

Catarina Morais^*, Dominic Abrams, Georgina Randsley de Moura

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

10 Downloads

Abstract

Before and after the 2016 US Presidential Election, this research examined Trump and Clinton supporters’ attributions about behavior of each leader, both of whose ethicality had been publicly questioned. American voters (N = 268) attributed significantly more dispositional factors to the outgroup leader than to the ingroup leader. Moreover, when the ingroup candidate won the election (i.e., among Trump supporters), unethical leadership subsequently became more acceptable and there was less desire to tighten the election process when dealing with unethical candidates. The opposite pattern was found among voters whose ingroup candidate lost the election (Clinton supporters). The results and implications are discussed.

Original language	English
Article number	3089
Number of pages	11
Journal	Frontiers in Psychology
Volume	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089
Publication status	Published - 22 Jan 2020

Keywords

Causal attribution
Election
Group processes
Leadership
Unethical

Access to Document

10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089Licence: CC BY

19845132Final published version, 501 KBLicence: CC BY

http://hdl.handle.net/10400.14/29618Licence: CC BY

Cite this

@article{baf82badcffc41ad98258725fc7107d0,

title = "Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections",

abstract = "Before and after the 2016 US Presidential Election, this research examined Trump and Clinton supporters{\textquoteright} attributions about behavior of each leader, both of whose ethicality had been publicly questioned. American voters (N = 268) attributed significantly more dispositional factors to the outgroup leader than to the ingroup leader. Moreover, when the ingroup candidate won the election (i.e., among Trump supporters), unethical leadership subsequently became more acceptable and there was less desire to tighten the election process when dealing with unethical candidates. The opposite pattern was found among voters whose ingroup candidate lost the election (Clinton supporters). The results and implications are discussed.",

keywords = "Causal attribution, Election, Group processes, Leadership, Unethical",

author = "Catarina Morais and Dominic Abrams and {Randsley de Moura}, Georgina",

note = "Funding Information: A marginal Supported candidate x Judged candidate interaction, F(1,225) = 3.85, p = 0.051, ηp2 = 0.017, revealed that the ingroup leader was perceived as having more external control (M = 6.13, SD = 1.63) than the outgroup leader (M = 7.37, SD = 1.54). This pattern was significant for Clinton supporters (ingroup M = 6.20, SD = 1.79; outgroup M = 7.42, SD = 1.58, t(145) = 8.34, p < 0.001, g = 0.78, CI [0.54, 1.02]), but not for Trump supporters (ingroup M = 6.59, SD = 1.58; outgroup M = 6.33, SD = 1.79), t(97) = 1.09, p = 0.277. Therefore, H3a was partially supported. No other main effects or interactions were significant (all Fs ≤ 2.88, p ≥ 0.091). Funding Information: We would like to thank GroupLab members, Professor Richard Crisp, and Dr. Mario Weick for the insightful discussions and suggestions for this article. We are grateful to the University of Kent and Funda??o para a Ci?ncia e Tecnologia (FCT) for the support to this publication (Ref. UID/CED/4872/2019). Funding. This work was funded by the University of Kent and Funda??o para a Ci?ncia e Tecnologia (FCT; Ref. UID/CED/4872/2019). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} Copyright {\textcopyright} 2020 Morais, Abrams and Randsley de Moura.",

year = "2020",

month = jan,

day = "22",

doi = "10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

journal = "Frontiers in Psychology",

issn = "1664-1078",

publisher = "Frontiers Media SA",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections

AU - Morais, Catarina

AU - Abrams, Dominic

AU - Randsley de Moura, Georgina

N1 - Funding Information: A marginal Supported candidate x Judged candidate interaction, F(1,225) = 3.85, p = 0.051, ηp2 = 0.017, revealed that the ingroup leader was perceived as having more external control (M = 6.13, SD = 1.63) than the outgroup leader (M = 7.37, SD = 1.54). This pattern was significant for Clinton supporters (ingroup M = 6.20, SD = 1.79; outgroup M = 7.42, SD = 1.58, t(145) = 8.34, p < 0.001, g = 0.78, CI [0.54, 1.02]), but not for Trump supporters (ingroup M = 6.59, SD = 1.58; outgroup M = 6.33, SD = 1.79), t(97) = 1.09, p = 0.277. Therefore, H3a was partially supported. No other main effects or interactions were significant (all Fs ≤ 2.88, p ≥ 0.091). Funding Information: We would like to thank GroupLab members, Professor Richard Crisp, and Dr. Mario Weick for the insightful discussions and suggestions for this article. We are grateful to the University of Kent and Funda??o para a Ci?ncia e Tecnologia (FCT) for the support to this publication (Ref. UID/CED/4872/2019). Funding. This work was funded by the University of Kent and Funda??o para a Ci?ncia e Tecnologia (FCT; Ref. UID/CED/4872/2019). Publisher Copyright: © Copyright © 2020 Morais, Abrams and Randsley de Moura.

PY - 2020/1/22

Y1 - 2020/1/22

N2 - Before and after the 2016 US Presidential Election, this research examined Trump and Clinton supporters’ attributions about behavior of each leader, both of whose ethicality had been publicly questioned. American voters (N = 268) attributed significantly more dispositional factors to the outgroup leader than to the ingroup leader. Moreover, when the ingroup candidate won the election (i.e., among Trump supporters), unethical leadership subsequently became more acceptable and there was less desire to tighten the election process when dealing with unethical candidates. The opposite pattern was found among voters whose ingroup candidate lost the election (Clinton supporters). The results and implications are discussed.

AB - Before and after the 2016 US Presidential Election, this research examined Trump and Clinton supporters’ attributions about behavior of each leader, both of whose ethicality had been publicly questioned. American voters (N = 268) attributed significantly more dispositional factors to the outgroup leader than to the ingroup leader. Moreover, when the ingroup candidate won the election (i.e., among Trump supporters), unethical leadership subsequently became more acceptable and there was less desire to tighten the election process when dealing with unethical candidates. The opposite pattern was found among voters whose ingroup candidate lost the election (Clinton supporters). The results and implications are discussed.

KW - Causal attribution

KW - Election

KW - Group processes

KW - Leadership

KW - Unethical

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85079067300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089

DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03089

M3 - Article

C2 - 32038430

AN - SCOPUS:85079067300

SN - 1664-1078

VL - 10

JO - Frontiers in Psychology

JF - Frontiers in Psychology

M1 - 3089

ER -

Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

CEDH: Research Centre for Human Development

Cite this

Ethics versus success? The acceptance of unethical leadership in the 2016 US Presidential elections

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Projects

CEDH: Research Centre for Human Development

Cite this