Study Reveals How Worldviews Shape Perceptions of Leaders

Research published on July 14, 2025, in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, reveals that individuals who perceive the world as a competitive environment are more likely to admire aggressive leaders. The study, titled “Savvy or Savage? How Worldviews Shape Appraisals of Antagonistic Leaders,” explores the contrasting views people hold about leadership styles and their implications.

The findings suggest that those who view society as a “social jungle” tend to see antagonistic behavior in leaders as a sign of competence. In contrast, individuals who believe in a more collaborative and friendly world often regard such leaders as ineffective. Christine Nguyen, a doctoral student at Columbia Business School and co-author of the study, stated, “Beastly is in the eye of the beholder.” This highlights the significant role personal worldviews play in evaluating leadership.

Nguyen and her co-author, Daniel Ames, Ph.D., a social psychologist and professor of management at Columbia, explored this relationship through a series of surveys and experiments involving over 2,000 participants. They found that individuals with strong beliefs in a competitive environment were more likely to rate antagonistic leaders as competent compared to those who viewed the world as cooperative. Participants who believed in a competitive social structure often credited aggressive leaders with effectiveness, while those with a more benign worldview saw them as obnoxious or naive.

In one experiment, participants rated various leaders based on their behaviors, which included both antagonistic and collaborative actions. The results consistently showed that those who viewed the world as a competitive arena were more forgiving of leaders’ aggressive tactics. Additionally, when evaluating renowned CEOs like Tim Cook of Apple and Mary Barra of General Motors, participants with strong competitive beliefs assumed that these leaders employed confrontational strategies to achieve their success.

The research also indicated that employees who identified more with the competitive jungle mindset were more likely to choose and remain with antagonistic managers. Nguyen noted that employees with stronger competitive beliefs reported having more antagonistic managers than those with lower beliefs. “This suggested to us that, over time, antagonistic leaders may surround themselves with employees who are more tolerant of their behavior,” she added.

These insights provide a deeper understanding of why some aggressive leaders continue to thrive despite creating tension within their organizations. Daniel Ames remarked that these findings could explain how antagonistic leaders are not only tolerated but sometimes celebrated, enabling them to maintain their positions of power.

While the study primarily involved participants from the United States, its implications may extend to various cultural contexts. Future research could further investigate how these dynamics manifest in different social settings, potentially offering a broader understanding of leadership perceptions worldwide.

The ongoing discourse surrounding leadership styles is crucial for organizations as they navigate the complexities of modern workplace dynamics. Understanding the values and beliefs that shape employee perceptions could influence leadership development and organizational culture.

For more information, refer to the original study: Christine Nguyen et al., “Savvy or Savage? How Worldviews Shape Appraisals of Antagonistic Leaders,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2025). DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000456.