Abstract
Students attending a Native Hawaiian-serving institution read statements from two hypothetical job candidates. The passages had equivalent meaning, but one incorporated Hawaiian leadership values (HLV) without identifying them as such. Participants judged the HLV candidate to have lower credibility, rationality, and effectiveness, and preferred the non-HLV candidate for a leadership role. Participants' ancestry, gender, and collectivism were unrelated to candidate preference. Business majors showed the strongest preference for the non-HLV candidate. Within majors, higher grade point average predicted preference for the non-HLV candidate. The results have implications for how educators may confront implicit assumptions about leadership.