TY - CHAP
T1 - Legitimacy Construction in the Presence of Multiple Validity Cues
T2 - An Experimental Investigation
AU - Schilke, Oliver
AU - Xue, Zeyu
AU - Haack, Patrick
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2025.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - How actors construe legitimacy perceptions of their social environment has been subject to considerable interest in social psychology and organization studies, with much research focusing on how collective validity cues inform individual propriety judgments. However, this research has either focused on one validity cue at a time or has assumed that multiple validity cues are congruent, thereby overlooking the complex interactions that may occur between different types of cues. In this chapter, we address this limitation by investigating the differential effects of validity cues on propriety judgments contingent on cue type (authorization versus endorsement), cue valence (positive versus negative), and the evaluator’s subject-matter expertise (low versus high). We report a vignette experiment involving a LinkedIn site of a fictitious deep-sea mining company. We find main effects of cue valence and cue type, such that positively valenced cues lead to higher propriety judgments whereas negatively valenced cues lead to lower propriety judgments, and both effects are stronger for authorization than for endorsement cues. Our findings provide important contributions to legitimacy research by demonstrating the importance of theorizing and systematically studying the role of multiple and potentially conflicting cues in the formation of legitimacy.
AB - How actors construe legitimacy perceptions of their social environment has been subject to considerable interest in social psychology and organization studies, with much research focusing on how collective validity cues inform individual propriety judgments. However, this research has either focused on one validity cue at a time or has assumed that multiple validity cues are congruent, thereby overlooking the complex interactions that may occur between different types of cues. In this chapter, we address this limitation by investigating the differential effects of validity cues on propriety judgments contingent on cue type (authorization versus endorsement), cue valence (positive versus negative), and the evaluator’s subject-matter expertise (low versus high). We report a vignette experiment involving a LinkedIn site of a fictitious deep-sea mining company. We find main effects of cue valence and cue type, such that positively valenced cues lead to higher propriety judgments whereas negatively valenced cues lead to lower propriety judgments, and both effects are stronger for authorization than for endorsement cues. Our findings provide important contributions to legitimacy research by demonstrating the importance of theorizing and systematically studying the role of multiple and potentially conflicting cues in the formation of legitimacy.
KW - Institutional theory
KW - Legitimacy
KW - Propriety
KW - Validity
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105018004402
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105018004402#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1007/978-3-031-93042-3_27
DO - 10.1007/978-3-031-93042-3_27
M3 - Chapter
AN - SCOPUS:105018004402
T3 - Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research
SP - 429
EP - 439
BT - Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research
PB - Springer Science and Business Media B.V.
ER -