Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity

The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt

Thomas Bradley Pinter, Chester A. Insko, Tim Wildschut, Jeffrey L. Kirchner, R. Matthew Montoya, Scott T. Wolf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)250-265
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Personality and Social Psychology
Volume93
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2007

Fingerprint

Guilt
Social Responsibility
guilt
leader
responsibility
Pressure
experiment
Group
Motivation
group interaction
interaction

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Social Psychology
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Pinter, Thomas Bradley ; Insko, Chester A. ; Wildschut, Tim ; Kirchner, Jeffrey L. ; Montoya, R. Matthew ; Wolf, Scott T. / Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity : The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007 ; Vol. 93, No. 2. pp. 250-265.
@article{16220c945218435aabaf047579e0823d,
title = "Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity: The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt",
abstract = "Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness.",
author = "Pinter, {Thomas Bradley} and Insko, {Chester A.} and Tim Wildschut and Kirchner, {Jeffrey L.} and Montoya, {R. Matthew} and Wolf, {Scott T.}",
year = "2007",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.250",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "93",
pages = "250--265",
journal = "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology",
issn = "0022-3514",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity : The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt. / Pinter, Thomas Bradley; Insko, Chester A.; Wildschut, Tim; Kirchner, Jeffrey L.; Montoya, R. Matthew; Wolf, Scott T.

In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 93, No. 2, 01.08.2007, p. 250-265.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reduction of Interindividual-Intergroup Discontinuity

T2 - The Role of Leader Accountability and Proneness to Guilt

AU - Pinter, Thomas Bradley

AU - Insko, Chester A.

AU - Wildschut, Tim

AU - Kirchner, Jeffrey L.

AU - Montoya, R. Matthew

AU - Wolf, Scott T.

PY - 2007/8/1

Y1 - 2007/8/1

N2 - Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness.

AB - Two experiments contrasted interactions between group leaders with interactions between individuals in a mixed-motive setting. Consistent with the idea that being accountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to benefit the in-group, Experiment 1 found that accountable leaders were more competitive than individuals. Consistent with the idea that being unaccountable to the in-group implies normative pressure to be cooperative and that high guilt proneness provides motivation to be moral, Experiment 2 found that when guilt proneness was high, unaccountable leaders were less competitive than accountable leaders and did not differ significantly from individuals. In other words, the robust interindividual-intergroup discontinuity effect was eliminated when groups had unaccountable leaders who were high in guilt proneness.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548829641&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548829641&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.250

DO - 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.250

M3 - Article

VL - 93

SP - 250

EP - 265

JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

SN - 0022-3514

IS - 2

ER -