The Psychological Assessment of Political Leadersity in response to environmental demands and/or in their ability to
effect the change once the need to do so is recognized. President
Clinton's very restricted range of complexity scores, regardless of
audience, topic, proximity to a decision, and so on, indicates that his
cognitive strategies are unresponsive to the environment.
Clinton may not recognize when circumstances indicate the desir-
ability of moving to higher levels of complexity—perhaps his
famous optimism hampers his ability to foresee the possibility of
failure—or, even if he realizes the need, he may be unable to formu-
late a more complex approach. Some observers have referred to his
frequent changes of policy or image in response to poll results and
similar influences (e.g., Morris 1997; Renshon 1996^. This pattern
is reflected in a comment by George Stephanopoulos that Clinton
was like a kaleidoscope: he "could change in an instant" (in B.enshon
1996a, 82). The successive abandonment and replacement (as
opposed to modification) of strategies are scored as a series of undif-
ferentiated inclusions/exclusions: a score of i.
We have not yet addressed the complexity aspects of Clinton's
habitual use, when under pressure, of language that "while techni-
cally accurate, [is] unresponsive and evasive" (Renshon 1996a, 138).
This tendency has surfaced on many occasions, both before arid since
he attained national prominence. In the latter period, it reappears
from his first presidential campaign (e.g., the controversies about his
avoidance of military service and his use of marijuana) right through
to his handling of the Lewinsky scandal.
The painstaking selection of words that seem to answer a question
categorically but upon closer examination do not meet some technical
definition necessary for a full response may be an example of impres-
sion management in that content is effectively and subtly manipu-
lated. However, the choice of particular words over others is not a cri-
terion for differentiation and therefore does not affect structural
complexity. Previous studies have found that particularly successful
leaders are more likely to show significant complexity increases when
faced with important, but not overwhelming, challenges. President
Clinton shows very little situation-specific change of any sort. This
unresponsiveness to environmental conditions is disquieting.