Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the research published in The Leadership Quarterly from its inception in 1990 to 2007. As the foundation for our study, we used self-reported limitations sections of empirical articles as an alternative, novel, and context-sensitive index of state-of-science. Limitations reported in the one-hundred and seventy-four empirical articles published in The Leadership Quarterly to date were coded according to traditional threats to validity. Our results indicate that LQ articles mostly report limitations related to external validity issues. Also, a growing concern with internal validity was noted. These findings offer a unique perspective on leadership research, one that paints a considerably different picture than that offered from previous empirical reviews. We discuss the role of self-reported limitations in scientific communication and offer some prescriptions for increasing their value.