Halo or trade-off? Assessing stereotypes about highly intelligent applicants' social skills and leadership suitability

This paper investigated how information about the intelligence scores of highly intelligent job applicants affected perceptions of trait social skills (i.e., personal charisma, emotional intelligence, empathetic listening) and, by extension, suitability as organizational leaders. Two competing hypotheses were presented. A halo-hypothesis based on the halo-effect predicted that participants would overestimate social skills and leadership suitability in applicants with high intelligence. A trade-off-hypothesis predicted the opposite tendency based on the tenet that individuals stereotypically devaluate “warmth/communion”-attributes among others perceived as “competent/agentic”. Results from two randomized, controlled experiments (total N = 486) supported the trade-off-hypothesis. Compared with the averagely intelligent, highly intelligent applicants were devaluated regarding social skills and leadership suitability (study 1). We found a similar pattern when comparing applicants with very high versus very low intelligence, although the negative effect of high intelligence on leadership suitability was indirect and only significant for mathematical (not verbal) intelligence (study 2). Practical and theoretical implications are discussed. • Stereotypes of highly (versus average and low) intelligent applicants were studied. • The highly intelligent were seen as less socially skilled and less apt as leaders. • This tendency was stronger for mathematical than for verbal intelligence. • Stereotypes about intelligent individuals may affect organizational decision making.