Leader Selection: Disturbing Evidence That Looks Trump Performance

Who would you choose to sail your boat?  Who would you vote for? Who do you want for your boss?

The little test above is from a study summarized in the always wonderful BPS Digest, my vote for the best place in the world to find translations of academic research.  It is from a forthcoming study in Science.  As BPS reports:

"John Antonakis and Olaf Dalgas presented photos of pairs of competing candidates in the 2002 French parliamentary elections to hundreds of Swiss undergrads, who had no idea who the politicians were. The students were asked to indicate which candidate in each pair was the most competent, and for about 70 per cent of the pairs, the candidate rated as looking most competent was the candidate who had actually won the election. The startling implication is that the real-life voters must also have based their choice of candidate on looks, at least in part."

Then, the researchers asked kids and adults the "who would you choose as the captain" question and "For the pair of candidates shown above, 77 per cent children who rated this pair, and 67 per cent of adults, chose Laurent Henart, on the right (the real-life winning candidate), rather than Jean-Jacques Denis on the left."

This is one of those things we've all suspected, but the evidence still jolts me a bit -- although I picked the guy on the left because, as a sailor, I equate messy hair with sailing skill, an irrational bias as well.

P.S. The reference is: J. Antonakis, O. Dalgas (2009). Predicting Elections: Child's Play. Science, 323, in press.

Comments

[Scib]

Wally, if perceived and actual competence were correlated then most elected politicians would be competent. Evidently, they are not, as Antonakis states in his Science paper.

[Hayli @ RiseSmart]

I agree with Hadley to a point, and reference Kris Dunn's recent post on the importance of confidence (and the ability to fake it). http://tinyurl.com/baluos
I personally would rather work for someone who projects confidence, even a tad bit of smugness, than someone who looks a bit crazed. And the bottom line is, no matter who has "all the brains," which man is a go-to, get-it-done kind of person? Without the courage to take action, the brains go to waste. And of course, nobody's really making a decision based solely on looks, but instead observing actions, words, and overall personality.

[michael webster]

I think that these types of experiments, while amusing, lack predictive power.

The experiments run like this: Ask someone to decided between A and B given radically incomplete information, and note that the prefer A over B on some rankable but presumably irrelevant dimension, such as looks, height, etc.

What other result could one expect?

[Sfrandsen]

I chose the guy on the left, too. He looks pretty intense and perhaps a bit crazed, but I seem to remember that voyage being pretty rough! He looks like he can deal with Sirens, evil Witches, and the like better than the other guy. He looks a bit soft for that trek.

[Tara Kelly]

--> although I picked the guy on the left because, as a sailor, I equate messy hair with sailing skill, an irrational bias as well.

Ditto.

[Henrik Martensson]

My first reaction, which I went with, was to refuse to pick a candidate based on looks.

I believe very strongly in checking the logic of the game rules before playing.

[Kathy H]

I picked the guy on the left also. I thought the guy on the right looked too smug.

This reminds me of the studies that show that being short negatively impacts your salary. And of course, that could be said for any other number of physical characteristics.

I guess that the more we're aware of our potential internal biases, the more we can overcome them and vote for or promote the best person.

[Stormchild]

Interesting. The guy on the left looks more competent to me, because he looks more serious. The fellow on the right looks just a bit like a glad-hander.

After a few moments more thought: this is probably arising from my corporate experience, where Marketing [and the guy on the right looks Marketing to me] had the $, but R&D [and the guy on the left looks R&D to me] definitely, oh, but definitely, had the brains. Pretty much ALL the brains, sad to say, and none of the power.

After even more thought: visions of the 2008 election dance in my head.

[dblwyo]

Oddly enough, or perhaps not for those who know me, my first choice was the guy on the left because he struck me as more competent while the guy on the right struck me as insipid. That was a quick gut call but on the next layer RHguy is smirking, too polished and has no facial muscular definition while LHguy looks more toned, tanned, focused and intent. Now you tell me he's a sailor !

[Wally Bock]

I'm sure that looks influence people and choices. But I have a hard time believing that an experiment where students are asked to pick the captain of their boat or the winner of an election comes within artillery range of reality.

[Hadley]

But maybe people who look competent are competent?