The reason why psychopathy is discussed in this thesis is because there are many similarities between psychopathy traits and the traits of effective leadership described earlier (Babiak and Hare, 2006). This chapter will first discuss what psychopathy is, to be able to report the similarities between effective leadership and psychopathy. Additionally, the biological mechanism behind psyhopathy will be explained, to be able to understand the influence of hormones on psychopathy and leadership.
2.2.1 What is psychopathy?
Psychopathy is an antisocial personality disorder (APD). An APD is “...a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood.” (American Psychiatric Association, 2001). There are two types of APDs, sociopathy and psychopathy. There is a thin line between the two different types of disorders. The only difference between sociopathy and psychopathy is the origin of the disorder. A sociopathic disorder is a result of environmental factors, whereas the cause of psychopathy is biological (Hare, 1991), the difference is nurture versus nature. Factors that play a role in the development of psychopathy and the factors that are the origin of sociopathy are parental neglect, poverty, delinquent peers and extremely low or extremely high intelligence. Factors that are responsible for psychopathy are biological. The most important biological factors are genetic predisposition, hormone ratios, low serotonin levels, abnormalities in the frontal and temporal lobes and abnormalities in the functioning of the amygdala (Gregory, 2012). DSM IV treats psychopathy the same as sociopathy, and therefore the two subtypes can’t be diagnosed using the DSM standards. DSM only gives guidelines for diagnosing APD. The main APD traits according to the DSM are disrespect to social norms, lying, conning, impulsiveness, aggressiveness, making risky choices, irresponsibility and lack of remorse. Hare (1991) has created a test, to measure psychopathy, the Psychopahty Checklist and the Revised Psychopathy checklist (PCL and PCL-R), the PCL-R is much more detailed than the DSM IV criteria. A number of 20 traits are central in the PCL-R, some of them are similar to the DSM-IV criteria, others are slightly different or additional. The 20 traits are briefly described, because together they form a solid reflection of psychopathy.
There are four different types of psychopathy traits according to Hare (1991). Interpersonal, affective, lifestyle and antisocial. The cluster of interpersonal traits is a cluster with traits that are related to interpersonal contact. The first interpersonal trait is glibness or superficial charm, psychopaths come across charming on the surface (Cleckley, 1982). Psychopaths are very agreeable and they make a distinct positive impression on people. They are easy to talk to, they appear friendly, completely normal, happy and well adjusted. They come across genuine and it is hard to notice their true nature. The second interpersonal trait is grandiose sense of self-worth. Grandiose sense of self-worth or self-importance is a narcissistic trait. Psychopaths often think they are superior compared to others and have a great sense of entitlement. They have the feeling that others exist to take care of them and see others as weak, inferior and easy to deceive. The third interpersonal trait is pathological lying. Psychopaths are often spreading lies to a pathological extent. They mix their lies with truth to prevent themselves from getting caught. When questioned, the truth in their stories is used to keep themselves out of trouble. Pathological lying is a result of a lack of guilt. The lack of guilt is the cause of the fact that they are able to switch quickly from telling the truth to telling a lie. The fourth interpersonal psychopathy trait is conning or manipulation. Psychopaths are good at hiding their true intentions from the ones they try to manipulate or con. It is often hard to recognize a psychopath, even for experts. They use much mental energy to analyze potential victims and they use their charms to form a good first impression. They analyze a victims value and try to learn how to influence their victims most efficiently.
The second cluster of traits is the cluster of affective traits and describes internal affective processes of the psychopaths. The first affective trait of psychopathy is lack of remorse or guilt. Thoughts about manipulating, hurting or using others are mostly over won by our conscience. The feeling of guilt or remorse is less or not present with psychopaths. This results in antisocial behavior, in behavior that a normal person would not show. The second affectionate trait is shallow affect. Shallow affect is in line with lack of remorse or guilt. Shallow affect means that a person experiences less emotions than others. Psychopaths have less emotional reactions on occurring events. The third affective trait is callousness or lack of empathy. Psychopaths lack empathy. It is possible that they lack in emotional understanding in general. They do not see people as persons, but more as obstacles, targets or objects to use. Psychopaths think that everybody is as unemotional as they are, which often results in antisocial behavior. The fourth affective trait is parasitic lifestyle. A three step system is often used by psychopaths to exploit victims. At first the victims utility, weaknesses and strengths will be investigated (assessment). When these three points are clear, manipulation will be used to siphon of resources (manipulation). After the manipulation, the victim has lost its value and the victim gets abandoned (abandonment). The fifth affective trait of psychopathy is failure to accept responsibility for actions. Avoiding the acceptance of responsibility for things that have gone wrong is a trait commonly observed in psychopaths. They have a wide range of excuses such as blaming others, faith and circumstances.
The third type of psychopathy traits is lifestyle related. The first trait in this cluster is need for stimulation. Psychopaths need more stimulation than a normal person to prevent getting bored. This often results in risky behavior. The main difference with a normal person that searches for novel stimulation is that the risks are carefully examined. The lack of examining the risks can result in an unfortunate outcome of a situation. The second lifestyle trait is promiscuous sexual behavior. A common feature of psychopaths is that they have a callous relationship with their partners and switch partners often to avoid a long-term, genuine and emotional relationship. This trait is closely related to the third lifestyle trait, which is short-term marital relationships. The fact that psychopaths have many short-term marital relationships is a direct result of the parasitic lifestyle (Assessment - Manipulation – Abandonment). The fourth lifestyle trait is the lack of realistic long term goals. Psychopaths mostly lack practicable goals in their life. Therefore they can be recognized by hopping jobs often, although they claim to have well defined goals and achievements. The fifth lifestyle trait is impulsivity, psychopaths act more impulsive, which is caused by a different level of activity in the two systems that regulate behavior, BIS and BAS. BIS and BAS will be explained in more detail in a following chapter. The sixth trait is irresponsibility. Examples of irresponsibility are driving unsafe, excessively loaning money, failing to pay bills and more. Nearly everybody is irresponsible at some aspects of their lives, the main difference with psychopaths is that they are structurally irresponsible, in all aspects of their lives.
The fourth type of traits is antisocial. This includes poor behavioral control, early behavioral problems, juvenile delinquency, revocation of conditional release and criminal versatility. The first trait, the poor behavioral control of psychopaths is an outcome of several personality traits such as the affective traits, need for stimulation and grandiose sense of self-worth. The second trait, early behavioral problems is closely related to poor behavioral control and somewhat distinguishes psychopathy from sociopathy. To be diagnosed as a psychopath, the behavioral problems should have occurred in an early stage of life, before the age of 15, in the form of a conduct disorder. The third trait, juvenile delinquency, is a result of early behavioral problems. The early behavioral problems can result in juvenile delinquency, which is often the case with psychopaths. The antisocial behavior is the cause of the fourth trait, revocation of conditional release. As a result of both the affective traits and the antisocial traits, conditional release is likely to be revocated by court, because of other felonies. A characteristic of the felonies is that they are versatile, which is the fifth antisocial trait described by Hare: criminal versatility. The felonies committed by psychopaths are more versatile, than felonies committed by the rest of the criminal population. This is a result of the affective traits and impulsivity.
American Psychiatric Association is one of the leading organizations in creating guidelines for the diagnosis of psychological disorders, their guidelines for diagnoses are bundled in their book DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Hare on the other hand is one of the leading researches in psychopathy and his checklists to diagnose psychopathy (the PCL and the PCL-R) are used by many psychologists. The problem is that the DSM-IV, PCL and PCL-R are to be used by experts and can’t be used by individuals that would like to test themselves. That is the reason why this research will use the 56 item questionnaire of C.J. Patrick (2010), which is based on the DSM-IV, the PCL and the PCL-R. The questionnaire measures three factors, boldness, disinhibition and meanness. Boldness is defined as low anxiousness, venturesomeness, the nexus of high dominance and high amounts of self confidence. Boldness measures the following traits: optimism, intrepidness, courage, dominance, persuasiveness, tolerance for uncertainty, self confidence, resilience and social assurance. Disinhibition refers to tendencies toward irresponsibility, impulsiveness, boredom, theft, anger or hostility and oppositionality. Disinhibition measures the following traits: impatient urgency, problematic impulsivity, dependability, irresponsibility, planful control, theft, alienation, boredom proneness and fraud. Meanness reflects tendencies toward predatory aggression, callousness or lack of empathy, excitement seeking and cruelty. Meanness measures the following traits: empathy, physical aggression, relational aggression, destructive aggression, excitement seeking and lack of honesty. As you can see, the three factors and the measured traits of Patrick are highly similar to the DSM-IV criteria and include most of the 20 traits described by Hare, with the exception of some, including superficial charm.
2.2.2 The corporate psychopath
One of the first events that showed the start of the 00’s credit crisis is the fall of a large financial services firm in September 2008. The fall of this firm was a result of subprime mortgage tranches in their portfolio, which rapidly lost value in 2007 and 2008, combined with a high leverage (1 to 30) and a high short term debt ratio (Zingales, 2008). Loads of subprime mortgages have been securitised by other investment companies, this was done to provide the fallen financial services firm with an improved liquidity which allowed them to acquire new subprime mortgage portfolios. Subprime mortgage relates to a mortgage, where there is a higher probability that there will be difficulties with the repayment of the mortgages. The firm in this case did not only pollute their own portfolios with that type of mortgages, but also the portfolios of investors, who assumed that the portfolios at sale had less risk. Additionally, the consumer was provided with risky products, which are still causing many consumers difficulties, because their debt is too high to repay. The process of investing in subprime mortgage obligations was to be observed on a large scale in the international financial sector, ranging from investment banks to insurance companies. Normally this would not have been possible because of credit rating agencies, but the firm in this case managed to manipulate these ratings because of their position in the market. Zingales (2008) states that the collapse of this firm was an unlucky draw of a consciously made gamble. The bankruptcy of this financial services firm is just one case, but more similar situations occurred all over the world.
The main point to be learned from the fall of this firm is that the leaders of this firm and comparable companies have made risky decisions and manipulated the market to enhance their own performance. Additional, they have sold obligations, knowing that the value of the obligations was lower than perceived by the investor, thereby bringing other investors at risk by their decisions. To summarize this case, we have seen some traits that are the core of the fall of this organization. The traits that could be connected to the behaviour of the management of this firm are, firstly, the need for stimulation and opportunism, because of the high risks that have been taken. Secondly, manipulation, because of manipulating credit rating agencies. Thirdly, callousness, lack of empathy, ego-centrism, ruthlessness, shamelessness because of knowingly securitizing high risk mortgage portfolios to buyers that are not aware of the content of these portfolios. And finally, ambition, because of the constant need to grow and to increase profits. The traits described above are the same traits as the ones of corporate psychopathy, described by Boddy (2010). This report does not diagnose any individual as a psychopath, but tries to show the resemblance between leadership and corporate psychopathy in general.
Hare is probably one of the most specialized researchers in the field of successful or corporate psychopathy. Babiak and Hare (2006) and Boddy et al. (2010) have found some similarities between traits connected to leadership and psychopathy. Table 2 summarizes these similarities between effective leadership, leadership emergence and psychopathy. The first trait that can be mistaken is a psychopaths superficial charm. A psychopath can be seen as charming, friendly, charismatic and likable because of its superficial charm (Boddy, 2010; Babiak and Hare., 2006). There is a thin line between superficial charm and charm, the main difference is the source of the charm. Superficial charm is fake and performed at the surface, to be able to manipulate victims, whereas regular charm is sincere. Secondly, emotion management is very important (Mayer, 1997), a leader who can’t handle emotionally laden situations without having hindering stress is not very suitable for a leadership function. A leader who is extremely stressed before and firing a follower, is not able to focus on his other activities. This emotion management can be mistaken for the callousness and lack of empathy of psychopaths (Hare, 1991). Another trait that is easily mistaken, is the need for power or taking charge (Winter, 1978), whereas Zaccaro (2004) names the same factor the need for dominance. Dominance in certain levels is harmless or even beneficial, except for when it is used by psychopaths to dominate and control others to get what is wanted (Babiak and Hare, 2006). Fourthly, manipulation is very hard to detect. Bass (1990) writes about the mediocre results of transactional leadership, not its ineffectiveness and finds proof for extra effort exerted by employees when actively using contingent rewards. Contingent rewards can very well be mistaken for the manipulation of psychopaths. The line between manipulation and normally influencing a person is very thin. But a manipulator mostly uses manipulation to benefit from it, whereas that is not the case with normal influencing (Babiak et al. 2006). Additionally, psychopaths are masters in hiding their manipulative behaviour (Babiak and Hare, 2006; Hare, 1991; Boddy, 2010). A fifth trait that is easily to be mistaken is ambition or need for achievement. Boddy (2010) describes that psychopaths are very eager to reach the top. The difference between healthy ambition and a psychopaths ambition is the sheer dedication to reach senior management functions. Additionally, the ego-centrism and self-serving behaviour of psychopaths can be mistaken for ambition. The sixth similarity concerns a leadership dimension, social cognition. Psychopaths are experts in identifying peoples personalities and in acting according their environment, they are often called social-chameleons (Babiak, 2006; Boddy, 2010). This can very easily be confused with the characteristics of empathy and agreeableness. The big difference between the chameleon-like ability and social cognition is that psychopaths are masters in finding and exploiting weaknesses and vulnerabilities of people, whereas the source of empathy and agreeableness is more sincere (Babiak, 2006). Also, risk taking and novelty seeking (related to creativity) look very similar to the behaviour that is the result of the need for stimulation of psychopaths. Lawrence (2008) describes that one of the strengths of an entrepreneur is that the entrepreneur dares to take healthy risks. This is correlated with a high testosterone to cortisol ratio. The big difference between the need for stimulation (Hare, 1991) of psychopaths and healthy risk taking, is that psychopaths take too much risk, which can result badly. Recruiters are often looking for energetic employees (Boddy, 2010), this energy can be mistaken for impulsiveness (Hare, 1991) of psychopaths, which can result in badly thought through decisions. Stogdill (1974) described confidence as one of the most important leadership traits that can be found across situations. There is a thin line between confidence and the grandiose sense of self-worth (Boddy, 2010; Hare, 1991; Babiak et al., 2006), the difference is hard to detect, because the two traits are much alike.
Charisma / charm
Callousness / lack of empathy
Reward power / coercive power
Need for achievement
Sheer dedication to reach senior functions
Need for achievement
Need for novel stimulation
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Table 2: Similarities between leadership and psychopathy
Babiak and Hare (2006) prove that there is a higher percentage of psychopaths in leadership positions compared to the normal population. The most recent research (Boddy, 2009) shows that 3,5% of the top management is psychopathic compared to 1% of the juniors in organizations. Cangemi and Pfohl (2009) challenge these percentages and expect them to be much higher based on their experience, not on research. Psychopathic traits result in behaviour as not responding to criticism, acting risky or unwise, unlikely to nurture future talent, not creating a harmonious team and incurring the loss of talented employees (Boddy, 2010). The big question is: “How do psychopaths get positions as leaders?”.
How do psychopaths end up on high organizational positions
Boddy (2009) and Cangemi and Pfohl (2009) have researched how successful psychopaths get themselves into high organizational positions. There are two important stages, that explain why there are more psychopaths at higher positions, recruitment and promotion. Let’s start with corporate recruitment. Corporate recruitment fails to identify corporate psychopaths. This problem lies in the nature of psychopaths and the type of people that corporations are looking for. Corporate recruitment is often looking for someone who is charming, energetic and fast moving. Psychopaths are able to present themselves as such. One of the psychopathy traits is superficial charm, which is easily mistaken for charm. Psychopaths are good at telling nice stories about themselves because they are self-centred en ego-centric (Boddy, 2010). They can behave as social-chameleons who blend in everywhere and can find connection to anybody (Babiak and Hare, 2006). This results in a distinctive, good first impression. They present themselves as of good ability and emotionally well adjusted and appear to be persuasive and nice to be around with (Hare, 1999). They come across intelligent and successful. Babiak and Hare (2006) show that more psychopathic offenders are from low social classes and have a lack of verbal intelligence, whereas the prevalence of psychopathy is equal in all socioeconomic classes. This indicates that psychopaths, who do not find themselves among the offenders are more intelligent, than the offending part of the psychopathic population. This is the reason why corporate psychopaths do not match the delinquency criteria, which are easily to discover by recruitment, by for example a criminal record. All these factors result in an impression where psychopaths appear very suitable for a job, which increases the odds that they will be hired for a specific job. That is the point where the second stage starts and where psychopaths start to work themselves up on the organizational ladder.
As described before in the paragraph about psychopathy, psychopathic behaviour can be divided into four categories. Interpersonal, affective, lifestyle and antisocial. All categories, except for the antisocial category, play a role in the process corporate promotions. The interpersonal behaviour contains superficial charm, manipulation and deceitfulness. Psychopaths are paradoxically likable (Taylor et al., 2003) and are good at telling people what they want to hear (Babiak and Hare, 2006). Co-workers and superiors are deceived by the superficial charm of the psychopaths (Glenn et al., 2011). The deceitfulness and manipulation are traits that are not quickly noticed, but these traits can help a person to get a promotion (Mahaffey et al., 2006), co-workers are used and deceived by psychopaths. The affective traits of psychopathy are reduced guilt and emotional responsiveness. This results in less negative emotions when a way up the organizational ladder is manipulated. For example, getting someone fired to be able to move up, could result in less increased stress, less guilt or less emotional response compared to non-psychopaths. The lifestyle trait, stimulation seeking can be linked to the need to move up in an organization and need for achievement. The stimulation and achievement in that case would be status and money. Boddy (2010) describes that psychopaths have a sheer, single minded dedication to reach senior levels in organizations.
2.2.3. Hypothesis 2 and 3
Boddy (2010) and Hare and Babiak (2006) describe the relation between psychopathy and leadership. They suggest that leaders are more psychopathic, than non- leaders. This suggestion is the base for Hypothesis 2, leaders are expected to score higher on boldness, disinhibition and meanness. Hare and Babiak (2006) introduce some similarities between leadership traits and psychopathy traits, Hypothesis 3 is based on this introduction. There should be a correlation between leadership traits and psychopathy factors. Charm, taking charge and creative thinking are expected to be positively correlated with boldness. Agreeableness, empathy and the need for affiliation should be negatively correlated with meanness. Risk taking and need for achievement should be positively correlated with meanness, whereas risk taking should also be correlated with disinhibition.
Hypothesis 2: The mean scores of leaders on boldness, disinhibition and meanness are significantly higher, than the mean scores of the control group on psychopathy factors.
Hypothesis 3: Charm, taking charge and creative thinking are positively correlated with boldness. Agreeableness, empathy and need for affiliation are negatively correlated with meanness. Risk taking and need for achievement are positively correlated with meanness and risk taking is also positively correlated with disinhibition.
2.2.4 Psychopathy and biology
Several researches have shown a relation between cortisol, testosterone and psychopathy (Terburg, 2009; Glenn, 2011). To specify the relation between hormones and psychopathy, the mechanisms behind the two hormones will be described. The hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA axis) and the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis (HPG) are responsible for the production of cortisol and testosterone (Terburg, 2009; Johnson et al., 1992). The HPA axis is activated during stressful and uncertain situations. The HPA axis influences the fight-or-flight system of the body and is meant to physically prepare the body for threat or stress. The physical results of HPA activation are increased hearth-rate, perspiration, increased startle reflexes, widened pupils and decreasing the activity in the digestive system. Activation of the HPA system is responsible for a moving towards a flight reaction. The start of the activation of the HPA axis is that arginine vasopressin (AVP) and corticotrophin-releasing hormone (CRH) are released in the hypothalamus (Johnson et al., 1992). The hypothalamus is a part in the brain that is mainly responsible for the organization of behaviour that is important for the survival of an individual, such as eating, fighting, fleeing and fornicating. The release of CRH and AVP starts the production and excretion of the adrenocorticotropic-hormone (ACTH) by the pituitary gland or hypophysis. The pituitary gland is responsible for the excretion of hormones, including cortisol and testosterone. Functions of other excreted hormones are temperature regulation, the activity of the thyroid, growth, the production of urine and ovulation and estrogen production in females. The pituitary gland is divided into two different compartments, the anterior pituitary and the posterior pituitary. The anterior pituitary is responsible for the excretion of ACTH. The excretion of ACTH is responsible for the facilitation of glucocorticoids in the adrenal gland. Glucocorticoids are steroid hormones, among which the most important one is cortisol. The adrenal gland is located on top of the kidneys and is responsible for the production of hormones.
The HPG system is involved in reproduction and the immune system and is responsible for the production of testosterone, it also influences the fight-or flight system (Terburg, 2009). Testosterone is responsible for moving towards the fight reaction (approaching). When activated, gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) is excreted into the hypothalamus, the nucleus praeopticus to be specific (Johnson et al., 1992). From there it is transported to the pituitary gland, the posterior pituitary. GnRH is responsible for the production and excretion of the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and the luteinizing hormone (LH). FSH is responsible for regulating pubertal maturation, reproductive processes, growth and development of the body, whereas LH is responsible for the production of testosterone in males. LH and FSH are transported to the gonads, where they start the production of testosterone. The gonads are the testicles in males and the ovaries in females. Testosterone influences the HPA axis functioning by decreasing the functioning of AVP, which results in less cortisol production. On the other hand, cortisol decreases the functioning of GnRH, FSH, LH and the production of testosterone in the gonads, which results in among others less testosterone production.
Coates et al. (2008) and Terburg, 2009) describe that situational factors such as successes, stress and uncertainty have an influence on cortisol and testosterone. These situational factors are especially important in leaders, because they are almost constantly present. This could muddle the insight in the baseline hormone levels of leaders, when measuring hormone levels. As stated before, stress results in higher cortisol levels, which trigger the flight reaction. Coates (2008) relates high cortisol levels to decreased job performance, which is a result of cortisol paralizing the minds critical abilities (Goleman and Boyatzis, 2008).
Ressler (2004) states that a good balance in motivational behaviour between avoiding danger and approaching goals is needed to survive. Arnett (1997) argued that psychopathy is the result of an imbalance in this motivational behaviour. This imbalance is a result of an over activity of the BAS and an under activity of the BIS (Gray, 1987). The BIS is the behavioural inhibition system, which controls the avoidance of stimuli. The BIS is driven by punishment, it stops an individual of behaving in a certain way, if that behaviour might be followed by punishment. The BAS is the behavioural activation system. The BAS is driven by rewards, it encourages an individual to behave in a certain way, if that behaviour might be followed by a reward. Arnett (1997) states that psychopaths show less autonomic arousal in situations of punishment, psychopaths show less skin conductance in these situations in comparison to “normal individuals”. Arnett connects this to a lower BIS activity. Additionally, psychopaths show more autonomic arousal in situations of reward, psychopaths have a higher heart-rate compared to normal individuals. Arnett connects this to a higher BAS activity.
The BIS and BAS approach is the psychological version of the biological HPA axis and HPG axis approach or the testosterone / cortisol approach. As already stated, the HPA and the HPG axis are both involved in the fight-flight system. A higher sensitivity to punishment could very well be an explanation of the relation between high cortisol levels and higher levels of anxiety and anxious depressions (Johnson et al., 1992). Testosterone influences the HPA axis by reducing the functioning of AVP. The reduced functioning that results in a lower cortisol level could be the explanation of the reduced autonomic arousal in stressful situations that Arnett (1997) found in psychopaths, such as lower hard heart-rate, and less skin conductance. Even stronger evidence of the connection between BIS / BAS and HPA axis / HPG axis lies in the stimulated gene expression in the amygdala. Testosterone stimulates the AVP gene expression, which is related to reward sensitivity (DeVries et al., 1995), whereas cortisol stimulates the CRH gene expression, which is related to punishment sensitivity (Schulkin, 2003). Testosterone is also found to be related to dominance (Archer, 2006), aggression (Blair, 2004) and anti-social behaviour such as law breaking, difficulties on the job, violent behaviour, marriage failure, alcohol abuse and drug use (Mazur et al., 1998). Multiple researchers have found a relation between cortisol levels and psychopathy (Holi et al., 2006; Cima et al., 2008). There has been found much correlation between psychopathy traits and testosterone and/or cortisol. Stålenheim et al. (1998) found a correlation between the anti-social and impulsive behaviour of psychopathy and testosterone in young males. Glenn at al. (2011) did not find a relation between testosterone and cortisol and psychopathy on an individual hormone level, they did find a relationship between the testosterone to cortisol ratio and psychopathy, which proves the interrelatedness of the HPG axis and the HPA axis.
2.2.5. Hypothesis 4 and 5
The previous chapter has described relations between hormones and psychopathy. This indicates that there might be a relation between hormones and leadership. Hypothesis 4 and Hypothesis 5 test whether that relation is present. Hypothesis 4 relates to the expected difference in hormone levels between leaders and a control group. Hypothesis 5 questions if there is a relation between hormones and leadership factors.
Hypothesis 4: Leaders have a lower cortisol level, a higher testosterone level, a lower cortisol to testosterone ratio, a higher AUCgT and AUCiTvalue, a lower AUCgC and AUCiC value and lower AUCgCT and AUCiCT compared to the control group.
Hypothesis 5: Cortisol, testosterone and C/T have a significant influence on the scores on leadership factors creative thinking, agreeableness, charm, empathy, need for achievement, taking charge, need for affiliation and risk taking.