Research on the transgression credit shows that groups may sometimes turn a blind eye to ingroup leaders who transgress moral norms. Although there is substantial research investigating the underlying criteria of what makes a “good” leader, research often neglects to investigate the role of followers in leader‐group dynamics. In this paper, we offer a novel approach to transgressive leadership by proposing that leader legitimacy is a key factor that determines whether followers’ reactions to transgressive leaders are positive or negative. Across two experiments, participants ascribed transgression credit only to transgressive ingroup leaders perceived as legitimate (Studies 1–2, total n = 308). Transgressive illegitimate leaders were viewed as more threatening to the group, were targeted for formal punishment, received less validation for their behavior, triggered negative emotions (anger and shame), and raised higher consensus for their removal from the leadership position than did legitimate leaders. This effect also occurred irrespective of the absence of formal social control measures implemented toward the transgressive leader (Study 2). Mediation analysis showed that leader illegitimacy triggered stronger feelings of group threat and stronger negative emotions which, consequently, fuelled agreement with collective protest against the transgressive leader. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

“领导权”：领导合法性在团体对过犯领导的反应中的作用

对违规信用的研究表明，团体有时可能会对违反道德规范的团体领导人视而不见。尽管有大量研究调查了“好”领导者的基本标准，但研究往往忽略了追随者在领导者群体动态中的作用。在本文中，我们提出了领导者的合法性是决定追随者对犯罪领导者的反应是正面还是负面的关键因素，从而提供了一种新颖的方法来进行过犯式领导。在两个实验中，参与者仅将过犯归功于被认为是合法的过犯小组成员（研究1-2，总数n = 308）。违法的非法领导者被视为对该群体的威胁更大，受到正式惩罚的对象，对其行为的认可较少，引发了负面情绪（愤怒和羞辱），因此与合法领导者相比，他们被解除领导职务的共识更高。无论是否采取了针对违法领导者的正式社会控制措施，这种影响也都会发生（研究2）。调解分析表明，领导者的不合法性引发了更强烈的团体威胁感和更强烈的消极情绪，因此加剧了人们对侵略性领导者的集体抗议。讨论了这些发现的理论和实践意义。