<![CDATA[This article aims to analyze the sociology of law and psychological mechanisms underlying the appeal of transgressive leaders, namely leaders who violate norms of fairness, honesty, and propriety but may nevertheless gain public support under certain conditions. It also identifies conceptual implications for addressing such appeal. This study employs a library research method using a descriptive qualitative approach, content analysis, and narrative synthesis of literature in social and political psychology. The primary conceptual source is Van Kleef’s (2025) framework, supplemented by empirical studies on moral judgment, norm violations, power perception, dominance, conflict, threat, and leadership. The findings indicate that the appeal of transgressive leaders can be understood through three interrelated mechanisms. First, moral judgment is contextual and influenced by group identity, interests, and the goals of observers. Second, norm violations can, under certain conditions, be perceived as signals of power and dominance, particularly when such violations are perceived to benefit a particular group. Third, perceptions of threat and conflict can increase preferences for dominant leaders. Based on these mechanisms, moral condemnation alone has limitations in addressing the appeal of transgressive leaders. Conceptually, relevant approaches include evaluating claims of benefits based on evidence, critically examining threat narratives, and distinguishing leadership firmness from norm violations. This study highlights the importance of understanding support for transgressive leaders as the result of an interaction between morality, interests, perceptions of power, and threat contexts, rather than simply as a reflection of low public moral awareness.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
