Evaluations of Dominant Leadership in Workplaces Are Associated with Paranoia

Abstract

Lower social status is one of the social factors associated with paranoia—the belief that others have harmful intentions. From an evolutionary perspective, paranoia is an adaptive psychological mechanism for coping with social threats. Two types of social status have been theorized based on differences in the social influence of superiors on subordinates: prestige and dominance. Dominant superiors force their subordinates to obey them through threats, and subordinates are motivated to avoid these superiors. Conversely, subordinates voluntarily approach prestigious superiors to gain beneficial expertise. If paranoia functions as a response to social threats, it is strongly associated with evaluations of superiors’ dominance in an immediate environment. A web-based survey of full-time workers (N = 300) examined the correlations between paranoia, evaluations of dominance and prestige toward leaders, and willingness to learn from leaders. We distinguished between a familiar leader (a workplace supervisor) and a distant leader (a leader in the broader community). In support of our hypothesis, paranoia was positively associated with the evaluation of a familiar leader’s dominance, but not with that of a distant leader’s dominance. However, contrary to our prediction, paranoia was positively associated with willingness to learn from leaders regardless of the type of leader.