Abstract
Reducing intergroup conflict is a significant leadership challenge. Leaders can alleviate conflict by promoting a collective, dual, or intergroup relational identity, but they should avoid provoking subgroup identity distinctiveness threat. Drawing on intergroup leadership theory, we conducted an experiment (N = 184) examining evaluations of a leader who promoted a dual, collective, or intergroup relational identity under low or high subgroup identity distinctiveness threat. We hypothesized that identity distinctiveness threat would improve evaluations of a leader promoting an intergroup relational identity, and worsen evaluations of a leader promoting a collective identity. Although a leader promoting a dual identity is typically preferred to one promoting a collective identity, we expected a leader promoting dual identity to receive worse evaluations than a leader promoting an intergroup relational identity. These hypotheses were supported, providing additional support for intergroup leadership theory and demonstrating the utility of employing intergroup relational identity rhetoric.