Back to my home page

For a recent list of my publications, which include preprint downloads and links to the papers, please click here : publications

Interesting stuff on my Science paper and related topics
Antonakis, J., & Dalgas, O. (2009).
Predicting elections: Child's play! Science, 323(5918), 1183. (free download of paper)
Abstract: In two experiments, children and adults rated pairs of faces from election races. Naïve adults judged a pair on competence; after playing a game, children chose who they would prefer to be captain of their boat. Children's (as well as adults') preferences accurately predicted actual election outcomes.

Extended Podcast discussion on our paper with Prof. Hoffrage available in English and French

Summary of the paper.

Podcast interview in Science.

Science press release English1, English2, French, Chinese.

University Press release in French and German

The ARD (German TV) challenge.
In collaboration with Professor Ulrich Hoffrage, and the show producers, I designed an experiment that got children to guess which of two politicians was elected in a particular election race. This experiment followed the "choose-the-captain-of-the-boat" protocol that was published in my 2009 Science paper. Learn more about this fascinating experiment here: http://www.ardmediathek.de/ard/servlet/content/3517136?documentId=8090616  (you can jump forward to 24 minutes and 15 seconds into the show).

The TSR (Swiss TV) challenge--I was asked to design an experiment, using children, to predict the governmental elections in the state of Neuchâtel. See how it went:

Part 1: http://www.tsr.ch/video/emissions/mise-au-point/538309-vote-t-on-pour-des-visages-ou-des-idees-experience-a-neuchatel.html

Part 2: http://www.tsr.ch/video/emissions/mise-au-point/538309-vote-t-on-pour-des-visages-ou-des-idees-experience-a-neuchatel.html#id=538311;nav=emissions/mise-au-point/538309-vote-t-on-pour-des-visages-ou-des-idees-experience-a-neuchatel.html

Participation in the TV program "Histoires des Savoirs":
http://www.tsr.ch/video/emissions/court-du-jour/103975-innovation-et-creation-l-habit-fait-le-moine.html#id=103975

Interview on Canada’s CBC:
http://www.cbc.ca/video/news/audioplayer.html?clipid=1869313197

Other interesting stuff
IQp Calculator : Antonakis, J., & Lalive, R. (2008). Quantifying scholarly impact: IQp versus the Hirsch h. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 956-969.

Calculate your IQp: download file
IQp calculator (note: enable macros for the excel file)

Abstract:
Hirsch's (2005) h index of scholarly output has generated substantial interest and wide acceptance because of its apparent ability to quantify scholarly impact simply and accurately. We show that the excitement surrounding h is premature for three reasons: h stagnates with increasing scientific age; it is highly dependent on publication quantity; and it is highly dependent on field-specific citation rates. Thus, it is not useful for comparing scholars across disciplines. We propose the scholarly index of quality and productivity (IQp) as an alternative to h. The new index takes into account a scholar's total impact and also corrects for field-specific citation rates, scholarly productivity, and scientific age. The IQp accurately predicts group membership on a common metric, as tested on a sample of 80 scholars from three populations: (a) Nobel winners in physics (n = 10), chemistry (n = 10), medicine (n = 10), and economics (n = 10), and towering psychologists (n = 10); and scholars who have made more modest contributions to science including randomly selected (b) fellows (n = 15) and (c) members (n = 15) of the Society of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. The IQp also correlates better with expert ratings of greatness than does the h index.

Here is my top-cited publication:
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor Full-Range Leadership Theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ Form 5X). Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
Abstract: In this study, we examined the validity of the measurement model and factor structure of Bass and Avolio's Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Form 5X). We hypothesized that evaluations of leadership—and hence the psychometric properties of leadership instruments—may be affected by the context in which leadership is observed and evaluated. Using largely homogenous business samples consisting of 2279 pooled male and 1089 pooled female raters who evaluated same-gender leaders, we found support for the nine-factor leadership model proposed by Bass and Avolio. The model was configurally and partially metrically invariant—suggesting that the same constructs were validly measured in the male and female groups. Mean differences were found between the male and female samples on four leadership factors (Study 1). Next, using factor-level data of 18 independently gathered samples (N=6525 raters) clustered into prototypically homogenous contexts, we tested the nine-factor model and found it was stable (i.e., fully invariant) within homogenous contexts (Study 2). The contextual factors comprised environmental risk, leader–follower gender, and leader hierarchical level. Implications for use of the MLQ and nine-factor model are discussed.

Note: you can find preprints for most of my papers here. If you don’t have access to the final prints, please send me an e-mail at john.antonakis@unil.ch