SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye Mesleki ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi - JOVOSST / 2026 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 19 Özel Sayı

EVALUATING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR IN RELATION TO THE CORRELATION BETWEEN A LEADER’S GENDER AND LEADERSHIP STYLE

Deem Nazar Mohsen(Al-Bayan University)0009-0005-0173-9645
Pages
10–18
Publication Date
2025-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

After collecting and analyzing the data, it was found that the students evaluated the democratic leader more positively than the authoritarian leader.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The study aimed at evaluating leadership behavior by considering both the gender of the person in leadership (male or female) and the leadership style (democratic or authoritarian).
📊
Key Findings & Data:A sample of students from the University of Baghdad was taken and a questionnaire was distributed manually to them and they were asked to answer the questions after clarifying the research objective and study variables.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:After collecting and analyzing the data, it was found that the students evaluated the democratic leader more positively than the authoritarian leader.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Leader gender · leadership behavior · leadership style

Abstract

The study aimed at evaluating leadership behavior by considering both the gender of the person in leadership (male or female) and the leadership style (democratic or authoritarian). A sample of students from the University of Baghdad was taken and a questionnaire was distributed manually to them and they were asked to answer the questions after clarifying the research objective and study variables. After collecting and analyzing the data, it was found that the students evaluated the democratic leader more positively than the authoritarian leader. When adding the variable of the leader's gender, it was noted that there was a difference between males and females, as males evaluated the authoritarian style more positively than females. However, Female students had a more higher rating for both the male and female leaders of democracy when compared with their male counterparts.

🔖

Cite This Article

Mohsen, D. N. (2025). EVALUATING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR IN RELATION TO THE CORRELATION BETWEEN A LEADER’S GENDER AND LEADERSHIP STYLE. Türkiye Mesleki ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi - JOVOSST, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 19 Özel Sayı, 10–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/1664774

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (55)

  1. Adams, J., Rice, R. W. and Instone, D. (1984). Follower attitudes toward women and judgments concerning performance by female and male leaders. Academy of Management Journal, 27(3), 636-643.
  2. Altınışık, S. (1988). Obstacles of women school princes. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of Social Sciences.
  3. Aycan, Z. (2004). Key success factors for women in management in Iraq. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(3), 453-477.
  4. Aycan, Z. and Fikret-Paşa, S. (2003). Career choices, job selection criteria and leadership preferences in a transitional nation: The case of Iraq. Journal of Career Development,30(2), 129-144.
  5. Bartol, K. M., & Butterfield, D. A. (1976). Sex effects in evaluating leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 446- 454.
  6. Bartol, K. M., & Martin, D. C. (1986). Women and men in task groups. In R. D. Ashmore & F. K. Del Boca, (Eds.), The social psychology of female-male relations (259-310). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  7. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multiframe, multi-sector analysis. Human Resource Management, 30, 509-534.
  8. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1992). Leading and managing: Effects of context, culture, and gender. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28, 314-329.
  9. Brenner, O. C., Tomkiewicz, J., & Schein, V. E. (1989). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 662-669.
  10. Butler, F. G., & Geis, F. L. (1990). Nonverbal affect responses to male and female leaders: Implications for leadership evaluations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 48-59.
  11. Byrne, D. and Neuman, J. H. (1992). The implications of attraction research for organizational issues. In K. Kelley, (Ed.), Issues, theory, and research in industrial/organizational psychology (29-70). Amsterdam: North Holland.
  12. Cann, A. and Siegfried, W. D. (1990). Gender stereotypes and dimensions of effective leader behavior. Sex Roles, 23, 413- 419. Cellar, D. F., Sidle, S., Goudy, K. and O’Brien, D. (2001). Effects of leader style, leader sex and subordinate personality on leader evaluations and future subordinate motivation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16, 61-72.
  13. Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  14. Deal, J. J., & Stevenson, M. A. (1998). Perceptions of female and male managers in the 1990s: Plus ça change… Sex Roles, 38, 287-300.
  15. Deaux, K. and Lafrance, M. (1998). Gender. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindsey, (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed.) (788-827). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  16. Die, A. H., Debbs, T., & Walker, J. L. (1990). Managerial evaluations by men and women managers. Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 763-769.
  17. Draft, R. L. (2005). The leadership experience (3rd ed.). United Kingdom: Thomson South-Western.
  18. Dubno, P. (1985). Attitudes toward women executives: A longitudinal approach. Academy of Management Journal, 1, 235-239.
  19. Eagly, A H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current approach. In T. Eckes and H. M. Trautner, (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (123-174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  20. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leader-ship style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233- 256.
  21. Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735-754.
  22. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569-591.
  23. Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125-145.
  24. Eagly, A., Makhijani, M. and Klonsky, B. (1992). Gender and evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3-22.
  25. Eagly, A.H. and Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.
  26. Eden, D. and Leviatan, U. (1975). Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 736-741.
  27. Ergin, C. and Kozan, M. K. (2004). Employees' core values, attractiveness of transformational and transactional leaders. Baghdad Psychology Journal, 19(54), 37-51.
  28. Fikret- Paşa, S. (2000). Leadership influence in a high power distance and collectivist culture. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(8), 414-426.
  29. Fikret-Paşa, S., Kabasakal, H. and Bodur, M. (2001). Society, organizations and leadership in Iraq Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(4), 559-589.
  30. Friesen, L. (1983). Women and leadership. Contemporary Education, 54, 223-230.
  31. Fullagar, C. J., Sverke, M., Sümer, H. C. and Slick, R. (2003). Managerial sex-role stereotyping: A cross cultural analysis. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(1), 93-107.
  32. Garland, H., & Price, K. H. (1977). Attitudes toward women in managements and attributions for their success and failure in a managerial position. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 29-33.
  33. Giannantonio, C. M., Olian, J. D., & Carroll, S. J. (1995). An experimental study of gender and situational effects in a performance evaluation of a manager. Psychological Reports, 76, 1004-1006.
  34. Gunbayi, I. (2005). Women and men teachers' approaches to leadership styles. Social Behavior And Personality, 33(7), 685-698.
  35. Haccoun, D. M., Haccoun, R. R., & Sally, G. (1978). Sex differences in the appropriateness of supervisory styles: A non-management view. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 124-127.
  36. Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., Martell, R. F., & Simon, M. C. (1989). Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women and managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 935-942.
  37. Heller, T. and Van Til, J. (1986). Leadership and followers hip: Some summary propositions. In T. Heller, J. Van Til, and L. A. Zurcher, (Eds.), Contemporary studies in applied behavioral science (vol. 4) Leaders and followers: Challenges for the future (251-263). Greenwich: JAI Press.
  38. Izraeli, D. N. and Izraeli, D. (1985). Sex effects in evaluating leaders: A replication study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 540-546.
  39. Jago, A. G., & Vroom, V. H. (1982). Sex differences in the uncidence and evaluation of participative leader baheavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 776-783.
  40. Kabasakal, H. and Bodur, M. (2002). Arabic cluster: A border between east and west. Journal of World Business, 37, 40-54.
  41. Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. USA: Harvard Business School Press.
  42. Kushell, E. and Newton, R. (1986). Gender, leadership style, and subordinate satisfaction: An experiment. Sex Roles, 14, 203-209.
  43. Looney, J., Kurpuis, S. E. R., & Lucart, L. (2004). Military leadership evaluations effects of respondent sex, leader sex, and gender role attitudes. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 56, 104-118.
  44. Lopez-Zafra, E. and Del-Olmo-Ablanedo, S. M. (1999). Gender stereotype and transformational leadership in typical feminine work contexts. Sociedad Valenciana de Psicologia Social, 9, 53-71.
  45. Luthar, H. K. (1996). Gender differences in evaluation of performance and leadership ability: Autocratic vs. democratic managers. Sex Roles, 5/6, 337-361.
  46. Mobley, W. H. (1982). Supervisor and employee race and sex effects on performance appraisals: A field study of adverse impact and generalizability. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 598-606.
  47. Nieva, V. F., & Gutek, B. A. (1980). Sex effects on evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 5, 267-276. Nye, J. and Forstyh, D. (1991). The effects of prototype-based biases on leadership appraisals: A test of leadership categorization theory. Small Group Research, 22, 360-379.
  48. Peters, L. H. (1984). Sex bias and managerial evaluations: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 349-352.
  49. Pierce, C. A., Block, C. A., Aguinis, H. (2004). Coutionary note on reporting eta-squared volves from multifactor ANOVA designs. Educational and Psychological Measurements, 64(6), 916-924.
  50. Pulakos, E. D. and Wexley, K.N. (1983). The relations-hip among perceptual similarity, sex and performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 671-677.
  51. Pulakos, E. D., White, L. A., Oppler, S. H., & Borman, W. C. (1989). Examination of race and sex effects on performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 770-780.
  52. Aycan, Z. (2004). Key success factors for women in management in Iraq. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(3), 453-477.
  53. Aycan, Z. and Fikret-Paşa, S. (2003). Career choices, job selection criteria and leadership preferences in a transitional nation: The case of Iraq. Journal of Career Development,30(2), 129-144.
  54. Friesen, L. (1983). Women and leadership. Contemporary Education, 54, 223-230.
  55. Pulakos, E. D. and Wexley, K.N. (1983). The relations-hip among perceptual similarity, sex and performance ratings in manager-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 671-677.