Advertisement

Journal of Chinese Political Science

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 473–497 | Cite as

Can Xi Jinping be the next Mao Zedong? Using the Big Five Model to Study Political Leadership

  • Tony C. Lee
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Abstract

It is commonly believed that the current Chinese president, Xi Jinping, shares a leadership style with Mao Zedong on account of his charisma, prosecution of political enemies, and centralization of power. But is there any substantial evidence to supporting that belief? This paper seeks to answer the question by employing the Big Five model to investigate three dimensions related to leadership style—namely, charisma, political tolerance, and need for achievement. The psycholinguistic program LIWC (Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count) is used to analyze Mao and XI’s utterances in order to measure and compare their personal traits. Findings suggest that Mao and Xi share similar levels of ‘extraversion’ and ‘openness to experience’, but differ in ‘conscientiousness’, ‘agreeableness’, and ‘neuroticism’. Thus, while both Mao and Xi exude charisma, Mao manifests lower political tolerance whereas Xi has a greater need for achievement.

Keywords

Xi Jinping Mao Zedong Big Five model Leadership style 

References

  1. 1.
    Allport, Gordon, and Henry Odbert. 1936. Trait-names: a psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs 47 (1): 171.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antonakis, John, Marika Fenley, and Sue Liechti. 2011. Can charisma be taught? tests of two interventions. Academy of Management Learning & Education 10 (3): 374–396.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Antonakis, John, Nicolas Bastardoz, Philippe Jacquart, and Boas Shamir. 2016. Charisma: an Ill-defined and Ill-measured gift. Annual Review of Organizational and Organizational Behavior 3: 293–319.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barber, James. 1972. The presidential character: predicting performance in the white house. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bass, Bernard M. 1990. Bass and stogdill's handbook of leadership: theory, research and managerial applications. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Block, Jack. 1995. A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin 117 (2): 187–215.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boin, Arjen, Paul’t Hart, Eric Stern, and Bengt Sundelius. 2005. The politics of crisis management: public leadership under pressure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bono, Joyce E., and Timothy A. Judge. 2004. Personality and transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 89: 901–910.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bono, Joyce E., Winny Shen, and David J. Yoon. 2014. Personality and leadership: looking back, looking ahead. In The oxford handbook of leadership and organizations, ed. David V. Day, 199–218. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Booth, John A., and Mitchell A. Seligson. 2009. The legitimacy puzzle in latin america: democracy and political support in eight Nations. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Briley, Daniel A., Matthew Domiteaux, and Elliot M. Tucker-Drob. 2014. Achievement-relevant personality: relations with the big five and validation of an efficient instrument. Learning and Individual Differences 32: 26–39.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burns, James MacGregor. 1979. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Castelnovo, Omri, Micha Popper, and Danny Koren. 2017. The innate code of charisma. The Leadership Quarterly 28 (4): 543–554.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cattell, Raymond B. 1946. Description and measurement of personality. New York: World Book.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cattell, Raymond B. 1957. Personality and motivation: structure and measurement. New York: World Book.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cawvey, Matthew, Matthew Hayes, Damarys Canache, and Jeffery J. Mondak. 2017. Personalityand Political Behavior. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, ed. William R. Thompson, 1-21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Connelly, Shane, and Gregory Ruark. 2010. Leadership style and activating potential moderators of the relationships among leader emotional displays and outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly 21 (5): 745–764.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Costa, Paul T., and Robert R. Mccrae. 1988. Personality in adulthood: a six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (5): 853–863.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dewaele, Jean‐marc, and Adrian Furnham. 1999. Extraversion: The Unloved Variable in Applied Linguistic Research. Language Learning 49 (3): 509–544.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Digman, John. 1989. Five robust trait dimensions: development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality 57: 195–214.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Digman, John. 1990. Personality structure: emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology 41: 417–424.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ellliot, Andrew J., and Marcy A. Church. 1997. A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 72 (1): 218–232.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eysenck, Hans J. 1947. Dimensions of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Friedlander, Saul, and Raymond Cohen. 1975. The personality correlates of belligerence in international conflict: a comparative analysis of historical case studies. Comparative Politics 7 (2): 155–186.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    George, Alexander. 1969. The 'Operational Codes': a neglected approach to the study of political leaders and decision making. International Studies Quarterly 13: 190–222.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gibson, James L., and Amanda Gouws. 2001. Making tolerance judgments: the effects of context, local and national. Journal of Politics 63 (4): 1067–1090.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Greenstein, Fred I. 2009. The presidential difference: leadership style from FDR to Barack Obama. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Guilford, Joy P. 1948. Factor analysis in a test development program. Psychological Review 55 (2): 79–94.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Guilford, Joy P. 1959. Perosnality. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hart, Jason W., Mark F. Stasson, John M. Mohoney, and Paul A. Story. 2007. The big five and achievement motivation: exploring the relationship between personality and a two-factor model of motivation. Individual Differences Research 5 (4): 267–274.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hermann, Margaret. 1980. Explaining froeign policy behavior using the personal characteristics. International Studies Quarterly 24: 7–46.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hermann, Margaret. 2003. Assessing leadership style: trait analysis. In The psychological assessment of political leaders, ed. Jerrold Post. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heylighen, Francis, and Jean-marc Dewaele. 2002. Variation in the Contextuality of Language: An Empirical Measure. Foundations of Science 7 (3): 293–340.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hinckley, Robert A. 2010. Personality and political tolerance: the limits of democratic learning in postcommunist Europe. Comparative Political Studies 43: 188–207.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Holsti, Ole R. 1976. Cognitive process approaches to decision-making: foreign policy actors viewed psychologically. American Behavioral Scientist 20: 11–32.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    De Hoogh, H.B. Annebel, Den Hartog, N. Deanne, and Paul L. Koopman. 2005. Linking the big five-factors of personality to charismatic and transactional leadership; perceived dynamic work environment as a moderator. Journal of Organizational Behavior 26 (7): 839–865.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hough, Leatta M. 1992. The 'Big Five' personality variables--construct confusion: description versus prediction. Human Performance 5 (1–2): 139–155.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Houghton, David P., ed. 2009. Political psychology: situations, individuals and cases. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    House, Robert J. 1977. A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. In Leadership: the cutting edge, ed. J.G. Hunt and L.L. Larson. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    House, Robert J., and Ram N. Aditya. 1997. The social scientific study of leadership: que vadis? Journal of Management 23 (3): 409–473.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Howell, Jane M., and Peter J. Frost. 1989. A laboratory study of charismatic leadership. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43: 243–269.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Huang, Chinlan, Cindy K. Chung, Natalie Hui, Yizheng Lin, Yitai Xie, Ben C.P. Lam, Weiquan Cheng, Michael H. Bond, and James W. Pennebaker. 2012. Zhong wen ban 'yu wen tan suo yu zi ci ji suan' ci dian zhi jian li (The construction of the Chinese version of the LIWC). Chinese Journal of Psychology 54 (2): 185–201.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hughes, Richard L., Robert C. Ginnett, and Gordon J. Curphy. 1996. Leadership. Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ilies, Remus, Megan W. Gerhardt, and Huy Le. 2004. Individual differences in leadership emergence: integrating meta-analytic findings and behavioral genetics estimates. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 12 (3): 207–219.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Judge, Timothy A., Joyce E. Bono, Remus Ilies, Megan W. Gerhardt, and Kevin R. Murphy. 2002. Personality and leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology 87 (4): 765–780.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lang, Jonas W.B., and Stefan Fries. 2006. A revised 10-item version of the achievement motives scale: psychometric properties in german-speaking samples. European Journal of Psychological Assessment 22 (3): 216–224.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Laswell, Harold. 1930. Psychopathology and politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lee, Tony C. 2017. Cold case: re-investigating group dynamics of the Chinese leadership during the 1989 tiananmen incident. American Journal of Chinese Studies 24 (2): 87–103.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lee, Ross, and Richard Nisbett. 1991. The person and the situation: perspectives of social psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Leites, Nathan C. 1950. The operational code of the Politburo. New York: The Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Marfleet, Gregory. 2000. The operational code for john f kennedy during the cuban missile crisis: a comparison of public and private rhetoric. Political Psychology 21 (3): 545–558.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Matsumoto, David, Hyisung C. Hwang, and Mark G. Frank. 2014. Emotions expressed by leaders in videos predict political aggression. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression 6 (3): 212–218.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    McClelland, David C. 1961. The achieving society. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    McClelland, David C. 1965. Toward a theory of motive acquisition. American Psychologist 20 (5): 321–333.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mccrae, Robert R., and Jüri Allik, eds. 2002. The five factor model of personality accross cultures. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mccrae, Robert R., and Antonio Terracciano. 2005. Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88 (3): 547–561.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    McCrae, Robert R., and Paul T. Costa. 1997. Personality Trait Structure as a Human Universal. American Psychologist 52 (5): 509–516.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mcfall, Lynne. 1987. Integrity. Ethtics 98 (1): 5–20.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Mchugo, Gregory J., John T. Lanzetta, Denis G. Sullivan, Roger D. Masters, and Basil G. Englis. 1985. Emotional reactions to a political leader's expressive displays. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49 (6): 1513–1529.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Mehl, Matthias R., Samuel D. Gosling, and James W. Pennebaker. 2006. Personality in Its Natural Habitat: Manifestations and Implicit Folk Theories of Personality in Daily Life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90 (5): 862–877.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Mill, John S. 1967[1843]. A system of logic: rationcinative and inductive. Toranto: University of Toranto Press.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mondek, Jeffery J. 2010. Personality and the foundation of political behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Murray, Henry A. 1938. Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Norman, Warren. 1963. Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66: 574–583.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Oskarsson, Sven, and Sten Widmalm. 2016. Personality and political tolerance: evidence from India and Pakistan. Journal of Political Studies 64 (1): 235–254.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pennebaker, James W., and Laura A. King. 1999. Linguistic Styles: Language Use as an Individual Differece. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77 (6): 1296–1312.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pennebaker, James W., Ryan L. Boyd, Kayla Jordan, and Kate Blackburn. 2015. The development of and psychometric properties of LIWC 2015. Austin: University of Texas.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Renshon, Jonathan. 2009. When public statements reveal private beliefs: assessing operational code at a distance. Political Psychology 30 (4): 649–661.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rosenthal, Seth A., and Todd L. Pittinsky. 2006. Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 17 (6): 617–633.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Schafer, Mark. 2000. Issues in assessing psychological characteristics at a distance: an introduction to the symposium. Political Psychology 21 (3): 511–527.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schoenhals, Michael. 1992. Doing Things with Words in Chinese Politics: Five Studies. Berkeley:Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Schoenhals, Michael. 1997. Keywords, Cultural Studies, Ethnicity and "Political Correctness": WesternDiscourse - Chinese Writings. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Spangler, William D. 1992. Validity of questionnaire and TAT measures of need for achievement: two meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin 112 (1): 140–154.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Stern, Eric. 2003. Crisis studies and foreign policy analysis: insights, synergies, and challenges. International Studies Review 5: 183–205.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Stoufer, Samuel. 1951. Communism, conformity and civil liberties: a cross-section of the nations speaks its mind. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Suedfeld, Peter, and Susan Bluck. 1988. Changes in integrative complexity prior to surprise attacks. Jounal of Conflict Resolution 34: 626–635.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Suedfeld, Peter, and Philip Tetlock. 1977. Integrative complexity of communications in international crises. Journal of Conflict Resolution 21 (1): 169–184.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Sullivan, Julie, and John Transue. 1999. The psychological underpinnings of democracy: a selective review of research on political tolerance, interpersonal trust, and social capital. Annual Review of Psychology 50: 625–650.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sullivan, John L., George E. Marcu, Feldman Stanley, and James Piereson. 1979. A reconceptualization of political tolerance: illusionary increases, 190s-1970s. American Political Science Review 73: 781–794.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Sullivan, John L., James Piereson, and George E. Marcu. 1993. Political tolerance and american democracy. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Tausczik, Yla R., and James W. Pennebaker. 2010. The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29 (1): 24–54.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Tetlock, Philip E. 1981. Pre- to post-election shifts in presidential rhetoric: impression management or cognitive adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41 (2): 207–212.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Thurstone, Louis L. 1934. The vectors of mind. Psychological Review 41 (1): 1–32.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Tupes, Ernest C., and Raymond E. Christal. 1961. Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. In USAF ASD Technical Report.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Tupes, Ernest C., and Raymond E. Christal. 1992. Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. Journal of Personality 60 (2): 225–251.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Walker, Stephen G., and Mark Schafer. 2000. The political universe of lyndon johnson and his advisors: diagnostic and strategic propensities in their operational codes. Political Psychology 21 (3): 529–543.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Walker, Stephen G., Mark Schafer, and Michael D. Young. 2003. Profiling the operational codes of political leaders. In The psychological assessment of political leaders, ed. Jerrold Post, 214–245. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Wiggins, Jerry S., and Paul D. Trapnell. 1997. Personality structure:the return of the big five. In Handbook of personality psychology, ed. Robert Hogan, John Johnson and Stephen Briggs, 737–765. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Winter, David. 1973. The power motive. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Winter, David. 1991. Measuring personality at a distance: development of an integrated system for scoring motives in running text. In Perspectives in personality: approaches to understanding lives, ed. A.J. Stewart, J.M. Healy Jr., and D.J. Ozer, 59–89. London: Jessica Kingsley.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Winter, David. 2002. Motivation and political leadership. In Political leadership for the new century, ed. L. Valenty and O. Feldman, 25–47. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Winter, David. 2011. Scoring motive imagery in documents from four middle eastern opposition groups. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict 4: 144–154.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Yukl, Gary A., and David D. Van Fleet. 1992. Theory and research on leadership in organizations. In Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, ed. M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough, 147–197. CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Zopiatis, Anastasios, and Panayiotis Constanti. 2012. Extraversion, openness and conscientiousness: the route to transformational leadership in the hotel industry. Leadership and Organization Development Journal 33 (1): 86–104.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Chinese Political Science/Association of Chinese Political Studies 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations