Nav: Home

Mind changing can be risky

June 08, 2017

WASHINGTON -- When leaders use a moral argument rather than a pragmatic one as the basis for a position, they may be judged harshly if they change that position later. They are perceived as hypocrites, less effective and less worthy of future support, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

"Leaders may choose to take moral stances, believing that this will improve audiences' perceptions. And it does, initially. But all people, even leaders, have to change their minds sometimes," said lead author Tamar Kreps, PhD, of the University of Utah. "Our research shows that leaders who change their moral minds are seen as more hypocritical, and not as courageous or flexible, compared with those whose initial view was based on a pragmatic argument. Due to this perception of hypocrisy, they are also seen as less effective and less worthy of support."

The research was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

In the study, Kreps and her colleagues conducted a series of 15 experiments online involving more than 5,500 participants from the United States ranging in age from 18 to 77. In each experiment, participants learned about political or business leaders who had changed their opinion on an issue. Some participants were informed that the leaders' initial positions were based on a moral stance. Others were told the position was based on a pragmatic argument (e.g., it was good for the economy). Across the studies, participants rated the leader who changed his or her mind on the moral stance as more hypocritical and, in most instances, less effective and worthy of their support than leaders whose initial stance was pragmatic.

What surprised the researchers the most was how difficult it was to eliminate the effect, according to Kreps. "In different studies, we tried to test various factors we thought might weaken the effect. For example, what if the leader used the same moral value in the later view as in the earlier view? What if the leader did not rely on popular support and therefore would have no reason to pander? What about participants who believed in moral relativism, the view that there is no objective reality in the first place? None of those things made a difference -- initially moral mind-changers consistently seemed more hypocritical," she said.

Kreps believes the findings suggest that people think that breaking moral commitments is not only difficult, but also wrong. "All in all, these results paint a glum picture for initially moral leaders. When leaders take a moral position, there appears to be little they can do to avoid being perceived as hypocritical should they find they later have to change their minds," said Kreps.

For leaders who insist on moral arguments, there is some good news if they have to change their minds later, according to Kreps. While in all cases, leaders who changed position on a moral stance were seen as more hypocritical, if leaders framed the change as a result of a personally transformative experience or out of their control due to external forces, they were not seen as less effective or unworthy of support.

"We know that moral beliefs do tend to stay more constant over time. So, leaders should take moral stances only if they have the underlying beliefs to back up those stances," said Kreps. "Taking an inauthentic moral view to try to pander to a moralizing audience could backfire, if a leader needs to change that view later on."
-end-
Article: "Hypocritical Flip-Flop or Courageous Evolution? When Leaders Change Their Moral Minds," by Tamar Kreps, PhD, University of Utah; Kristin Laurin, PhD, University of British Columbia; and Anna Merritt, PhD, Stanford University. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, published online June 8, 2017.

Full text of the article is available from the APA Public Affairs Office and at

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/psp-pspi0000103.pdf.

Contact: Tamar Kreps via email at tamar.kreps@utah.edu or by phone (801) 581-4270.

The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA's membership includes nearly 115,700 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people's lives.

http://www.apa.org

If you do not want to receive APA news releases, please let us know at public.affairs@apa.org or 202-336-5700.

American Psychological Association

Related Leaders Articles:

'Purposeful leaders' are winning hearts and minds in workplaces, study finds
People are happier and more productive when their leaders show strong morals, a clear vision and commitment to stakeholders, a new study has found.
Charismatic leaders: Too much of a good thing?
How important is charisma in a leader? While at least a moderate level is important, too much may hinder a leader's effectiveness, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.
Abusing power hurts leaders, too
We know that power can corrupt, making people act in ways that harm others.
When people prepare for conflict, dominant leaders take the stage
One popular theory holds that dominant leaders are supported by those who fear new situations and threats.
Global consortium formed to educate leaders on climate and health
With funding from The Rockefeller Foundation, Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, home to the nation's first academic program in climate and health, today announces a Global Consortium on Climate and Health Education to share best scientific and educational practices and design model curricula on the health impacts of climate change for academic and non-academic audiences.
Leaders and managers should be taught how to 'love' their staff
Chartered Psychologist (Occupational) Dr. Fiona Beddoes-Jones, in a study of over 300 managers/leaders, found the majority of respondents were dissatisfied with the level of warmth and care displayed at work and believed that their wellbeing would be improved if there was more 'love.'
Exclusive: Biotechnology leaders surveyed about impact of Trump presidency
The day following the election of Donald J. Trump as President, a survey of leaders in biotechnology in the United States, conducted by Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News showed that Trump's presidency will negatively impact NIH research funding as well as STEM education; a plurality said it will also spark a 'brain drain' as foreign-born researchers educated in American universities will be more likely to leave.
Customer-oriented firms are environmental leaders
The extent to which companies orient themselves around their customers contributes to their adoption of environmental management practices and hence their capacity for environmental innovation.
Leaders in Healthcare
Join aspiring leaders to address some of the biggest issues facing healthcare leadership and management in the UK, affecting the professional workforce as well as the population.
UTSA professor's new study emphasizes the impact of leaders' language
A new study by Jonathan R. Clark, assistant professor of management at The University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA), states that the language of leaders has a profound effect on the performance of their employees.

Related Leaders Reading:

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Anthropomorphic
Do animals grieve? Do they have language or consciousness? For a long time, scientists resisted the urge to look for human qualities in animals. This hour, TED speakers explore how that is changing. Guests include biological anthropologist Barbara King, dolphin researcher Denise Herzing, primatologist Frans de Waal, and ecologist Carl Safina.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#SB2 2019 Science Birthday Minisode: Mary Golda Ross
Our second annual Science Birthday is here, and this year we celebrate the wonderful Mary Golda Ross, born 9 August 1908. She died in 2008 at age 99, but left a lasting mark on the science of rocketry and space exploration as an early woman in engineering, and one of the first Native Americans in engineering. Join Rachelle and Bethany for this very special birthday minisode celebrating Mary and her achievements. Thanks to our Patreons who make this show possible! Read more about Mary G. Ross: Interview with Mary Ross on Lash Publications International, by Laurel Sheppard Meet Mary Golda...