↓ Skip to main content

The evolution of leader–follower reciprocity: the theory of service-for-prestige

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
14 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
140 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
203 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The evolution of leader–follower reciprocity: the theory of service-for-prestige
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00363
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael E. Price, Mark Van Vugt

Abstract

We describe the service-for-prestige theory of leadership, which proposes that voluntary leader-follower relations evolved in humans via a process of reciprocal exchange that generated adaptive benefits for both leaders and followers. We propose that although leader-follower relations first emerged in the human lineage to solve problems related to information sharing and social coordination, they ultimately evolved into exchange relationships whereby followers could compensate leaders for services which would otherwise have been prohibitively costly for leaders to provide. In this exchange, leaders incur costs to provide followers with public goods, and in return, followers incur costs to provide leaders with prestige (and associated fitness benefits). Because whole groups of followers tend to gain from leader-provided public goods, and because prestige is costly for followers to produce, the provisioning of prestige to leaders requires solutions to the "free rider" problem of disrespectful followers (who benefit from leader services without sharing the costs of producing prestige). Thus service-for-prestige makes the unique prediction that disrespectful followers of beneficial leaders will be targeted by other followers for punitive sentiment and/or social exclusion. Leader-follower relations should be more reciprocal and mutually beneficial when leaders and followers have more equal social bargaining power. However, as leaders gain more relative power, and their high status becomes less dependent on their willingness to pay the costs of benefitting followers, service-for-prestige predicts that leader-follower relations will become based more on leaders' ability to dominate and exploit rather than benefit followers. We review evidential support for a set of predictions made by service-for-prestige, and discuss how service-for-prestige relates to social neuroscience research on leadership.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 198 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 26%
Student > Master 27 13%
Researcher 25 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 9%
Other 31 15%
Unknown 29 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 67 33%
Business, Management and Accounting 28 14%
Social Sciences 21 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 3%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 38 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 50. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2022.
All research outputs
#829,689
of 25,183,822 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#370
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,854
of 234,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#23
of 242 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,183,822 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 234,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 242 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.