Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Testing the babble hypothesis: Speaking time predicts leader emergence in small groups

  • Neil G. MacLaren
  • , Francis J. Yammarino
  • , Shelley D. Dionne
  • , Hiroki Sayama
  • , Michael D. Mumford
  • , Shane Connelly
  • , Robert W. Martin
  • , Tyler J. Mulhearn
  • , E. Michelle Todd
  • , Ankita Kulkarni
  • , Yiding Cao
  • , Gregory A. Ruark
  • State University of New York Binghamton University
  • University of Oklahoma
  • Neurostat Analytical Solutions, LLC
  • Drexel University
  • United States Army

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

70 Scopus citations

Abstract

The large, positive correlation between speaking time and leader emergence is well-established. As such, some authors have argued for a “babble hypothesis” of leadership, suggesting that only the quantity of speaking, not its quality, determines leader emergence. However, previous tests of this notion may have been problematic. Some studies have asserted a causal effect of speaking time on leader emergence based on experimental studies, but have limited participant communication, access to reliable information, or both. Other studies have used more ecologically valid designs, but have not always controlled for relevant participant traits or roles, suggesting potential endogeneity effects. Testing the babble hypothesis thus requires a study that is both ecologically valid and supports strong inference. The current study fills that gap and finds that speaking time retains its direct effect on leader emergence when accounting for intelligence, personality, gender, and the endogeneity of speaking time.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101409
JournalLeadership Quarterly
Volume31
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2020

Keywords

  • Babble hypothesis
  • Individual differences
  • Leader emergence
  • Speaking time

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Testing the babble hypothesis: Speaking time predicts leader emergence in small groups'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this