Basran Jaskaran, Pires Claudia, Matos Marcela, McEwan Kirsten, Gilbert Paul
Centre for Compassion Research and Training, University of Derby, Derby, United Kingdom.
Center for Research in Neuropsychology and Cognitive Behavioral Intervention (CINEICC), University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Front Psychol. 2019 Jan 22;9:2460. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02460. eCollection 2018.
There is general agreement that styles of leadership evolved from mammalian group living strategies that form social ranks. In both non-human primates and humans, different styles of hierarchical dominant-subordinate and leader-follower behavior can be observed. These can be described in terms of dimensions of antisocial (relatively self-focused, aggressive and threat-based) and prosocial (relatively empathic, caring, and supportive) interpersonal styles. The aim of this study was to explore how a set of established self-report questionnaires might relate to these two dimensions. Two hundred and nineteen students completed questionnaires assessing ruthless self-advancement, coalition building, and dominant leadership styles, as well as hypercompetitiveness, narcissism, striving to avoid inferiority, compassion focused and ego focused goals, fears of compassion, social safeness and attachment (in)security. A principal component analysis supported an antisocial leadership style factor which comprised of ruthless self-advancement, narcissism and hypercompetitiveness. This was significantly correlated with fears of compassion, ego focused goals, insecure striving (striving to avoid inferiority), fears of losing out, fears of being overlooked, fears of being rejected, and avoidant relating in close relationships. It was significantly negatively correlated with compassionate goals. As the results did not reveal a clear factor solution for a prosocial leadership style, we chose to use the coalition building leadership style variable. This showed the opposite pattern, being significantly negatively correlated with narcissism, hypercompetitiveness, fears of compassion, fears of active rejection, and avoidance in close relationships. It was significantly positively correlated with secure striving, compassionate goals, and social safeness. We also found that fears of compassion for others was a partial mediator of the relationship between insecure striving with antisocial leadership style. Moreover, lower fears of compassion for the self emerged as a key mediator for the relationship between non-avoidant attachment with coalition building leadership style and, secure non-striving with coalition building leadership style. While the motive to accumulate social power, resources and dominance may be linked to antisocial forms of leadership, the intensity of the drive may also be linked to unaddressed threats and fears of rejection and fears of compassion. Efforts to promote more ethical, moral and prosocial forms of leadership may falter if such fears are left unaddressed.
人们普遍认为，领导风格是从形成社会等级的哺乳动物群体生活策略演变而来的。在非人类灵长类动物和人类中，都可以观察到不同类型的等级主导-从属和领导-跟随行为。这些行为可以用反社会（相对以自我为中心、攻击性强且基于威胁）和亲社会（相对有同理心、关怀和支持）的人际风格维度来描述。本研究的目的是探讨一组既定的自我报告问卷如何与这两个维度相关联。219名学生完成了问卷，这些问卷评估了无情的自我提升、联盟建设和主导领导风格，以及过度竞争、自恋、努力避免自卑、以同情为重点和以自我为重点的目标、对同情的恐惧、社会安全感和依恋（不）安全感。主成分分析支持了一种反社会领导风格因素，该因素由无情的自我提升、自恋和过度竞争组成。这与对同情的恐惧、以自我为重点的目标、不安全的努力（努力避免自卑）、害怕失败、害怕被忽视、害怕被拒绝以及在亲密关系中的回避型关系显著相关。它与同情目标显著负相关。由于结果没有揭示亲社会领导风格的清晰因素解决方案，我们选择使用联盟建设领导风格变量。这显示出相反的模式，与自恋、过度竞争、对同情的恐惧、对主动拒绝的恐惧以及亲密关系中的回避行为显著负相关。它与安全的努力、同情目标和社会安全感显著正相关。我们还发现，对他人同情的恐惧是不安全努力与反社会领导风格之间关系的部分中介因素。此外，对自我同情的较低恐惧成为非回避型依恋与联盟建设领导风格之间关系以及安全的非努力与联盟建设领导风格之间关系的关键中介因素。虽然积累社会权力、资源和主导地位的动机可能与反社会形式的领导有关，但这种驱动力的强度也可能与未解决的威胁以及对拒绝和同情的恐惧有关。如果这些恐惧得不到解决，促进更符合道德、伦理和亲社会形式领导的努力可能会受挫。
