Presidential greatness: The historical consensus and its psychological significance

Abstract

Two interconnected questions are addressed. One,\ndoes a historical consensus exist concerning the\ndifferential “greatness” of the American presidents?\nTwo, what do these ratings imply about presidential\nleadership? A factor analysis of 16 assessments\nindicated the presence of a primary “greatness”\ndimension and a bipolar “dogmatism” dimension. The\nthree most recent measures were then singled out for\nan analysis aimed at identifying the antecedents of\npresidential greatness. Hundreds of potential\npredictors were operationalized, including family\nbackground, personality traits, occupational and\npolitical experiences, and administration\nevents. Five predictors replicated across the\ngreatness measures and survived tests for\ntranshistorical invariance. In descending order of\npredictive generality, these are the number of years\nin office, the number of years as a wartime\ncommander-in-chief, administration scandal,\nassassination, and having entered office as a\nnational war hero. The theoretical meaning of these\npredictors is explored in further empirical analysis\nand discussion.