Scientists try to define charisma

Rob Muldoon had it. So did David Lange. But were these charismatic Kiwis born with X-factor or was it something they learned?

The slippery concept of charisma has eluded definition for centuries, and continues to do so.

An article in the New Scientist this week canvassed American research, which included suggestions charisma can be learned and lost, and cited Apple founder Steve Jobs and United States President Barack Obama as examples.

But Victoria University associate professor of psychology Marc Wilson suspects it’s not that simple, and the mysterious X-factor is a combination of both nature and nurture.

‘‘I suspect that charisma is not a singular thing, but a combination of things.

‘‘If your parents are utterly boring, dull people then the chances are you’re going to tend towards boring and dull. But at the same time, given that the environment is an important part of this, there is the possibility that you can be charismatic – you just have to work harder at it.’’

Charismatic figures tend to be outgoing and likeable, with the ability to engage with people and adapt to their reaction, all of which can be taught to some extent – good news for wallflowers who want reinvent themselves as life-of-the party types.

The American report points to how Steve Jobs was known to have spent up to 10 hours practising apparently off-the-cuff 10-minute presentations that portrayed him as a visionary, charismatic leader.

And as for our own political comparisons, Wilson says Muldoon and Lange were both ‘‘brilliant examples’’ of fast-thinking, witty and charismatic characters, compared with current Prime Minister John Key.