ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026
Workplace gaslighting: a construct for organizational research.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- When leadership turns covert: conceptualizing and developing a scale for Leader's Manipulative Workplace Behavior.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scholarly interest in gaslighting research has surged across various domains, particularly after it was named the word of the year in 2022. Despite growing research on the topic of gaslighting, the literature on workplace gaslighting remains limited, hindering the establishment of a clear, definitive concept. We review current scholarship on gaslighting through a systematic literature review and analyze definitions across various disciplines. The thematic analysis of definitions was used to delineate the attributes of the gaslighting phenomenon into necessary and contingent. We conceptualize that workplace gaslighting phenomenon comprises of necessary gaslighting behaviors by gaslighters and contingent experience of gaslighting by gaslightees. Gaslighting behaviors have necessary attributes of: (a) trivialization, i.e., minimizing employees' work and non-work-related concerns and (b) affliction potential, i.e., ability to cause pain, distress, suffering or negative outcome. The experience of gaslighting can escalate to distortion of reality/confusion/self-doubt which is contingent upon perceived power imbalance. Due to the pervasive and covert nature of the construct proving of intention is not always possible, hence intentionality is considered contingent. Based on our findings, we propose a definition of workplace gaslighting and suggest areas for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.