Cognitive Model of Leadership Perceptions among Generation Z Students: A Quantitative Study in the College Context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19910843Keywords:
Generation Z, cognitive model, transformational leadership, empathy, student leadership, pedagogical observation, socially responsible leadershipAbstract
The article examines cognitive representations of leadership among college students belonging to Generation Z (born in 2007–2008). The aim of the study is to identify students’ cognitive model of leadership and to compare it with contemporary leadership theories.
The research was conducted based on a quantitative empirical design. In the empirical part, a structured pedagogical observation method of a quantitative nature was applied. Leadership behavior indicators of 48 students (initiative, communicative activity, group coordination, responsibility in decision-making, and empathetic support) were assessed using a 4-point scale.
The results showed that empathy (83%), communicative activity (76%), and group coordination (71%) are dominant in students’ perceptions of leadership. This indicates that students tend to enact leadership through coordination and support. In conclusion, it was found that the cognitive model of leadership among Generation Z students corresponds to transformational leadership and socially responsible leadership theories. The findings highlight the importance of approaches focused on teamwork, emotional intelligence, and social engagement in the educational process.
References
1. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press.
2. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
3. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
4. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
5. Day, D. V. (2000). Leadership development: A review in context. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 581–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00061-8
6. Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership development: A review of 25 years of research and theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004
7. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 765–780. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.765
8. Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2005.0061
9. Komives, S. R., & Wagner, W. (2017). Leadership for a better world: Understanding the social change model of leadership development (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
10. Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56(4), 241–270.
11. Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. Jossey-Bass.
12. Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.
13. Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Pearson
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 A. M. Akhmetkali, K. B. Akhataeva (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
