This dissertation examines the effects of prescriptive stereotype violations about competence on East Asians' ratings of leadership potential. Despite being perceived as competent, East Asians are underrepresented in leadership positions across different industries in the United States, a phenomenon known as the “bamboo ceiling.” This study investigated whether East Asians are held to a higher standard of technical competence than Whites regarding career outcomes such as possessing leadership potential and receiving rewards, or being perceived with the same level of respect, trust, liking, and boss desirability. The study used a 2 (Target’s Race: East Asian and White) x 3 (Technical Competence: Display, Withhold and Control ) between-subjects design, with participants recruited from the tech industry. The results revealed that the stereotype of Asians being competent is so entrenched that Asians were rated higher on overall competence even when they failed to demonstrate high technical competence or when no information was shared on technical competence compared to their White counterparts. However, the higher level of perceived competence for East Asians did not translate into a corresponding higher rating of their career outcomes such as leadership potential or recommendations for rewards. This study sheds light on the challenges that East Asians face and underscores the need for organizations to reevaluate their evaluation processes and criteria.

This thesis takes as its starting point the observation that the authorship of the creative product of orchestral performances has been, and continues to be, over-attributed to the conductor. This is reflected both in popular perceptions and in the scholarly attention given to the conductor's leadership role, as well as in orchestral practices which privilege the conductor's artistically superior position within the orchestra through rehearsal and performance rituals and in remuneration and marketing. Although existing research has challenged the perception that the authority of the conductor is absolute, none has offered alternative explanations for how best to attribute the authorship of orchestral performances. Through a three-phased mixed-methods empirical study including an online questionnaire, in-depth interviews, and a newly developed method of data collection utilising an online variation of video-stimulated recall to capture musician experiences in real-life rehearsal and performance settings, this research contributes to an understanding of the social psychology of orchestral performance by identifying what prompts musicians' decision-making regarding how and when to play their parts. The analysis of the data has resulted in the development of a theoretical Framework of Influence and Action in Orchestral Performance that offers a new way of conceptualising authorship in performance through a 'theory of influence'. It concludes with an exploration of the implications of this revised view of authorship for existing orchestral practices, group creativity research, and our understanding of how the relationships enacted in the micro-socialities of orchestral performance reflect larger social formations.