ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
How leader-enforced positivity and humility-aspiration signaling shape emotional exhaustion and unethical behavior: evidence for distinct psychological pathways.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research examines how two contrasting leader signals-leader-enforced positive display rules (EPDR) and humility-aspiration signaling (HAS)-impact employees' emotional exhaustion and unethical pro-self behavior. Drawing on social information processing theory, we propose a dual-pathway model in which EPDR leads to state suppression, whereas HAS fosters state meaning-making, which predicts emotional exhaustion and unethical pro-self behavior. Study 1 employed a time-lagged survey design with 489 full-time employees. Study 2 used a between-subjects vignette experiment with 276 full-time employees and experimentally manipulated EPDR versus HAS. The results showed that EPDR was positively related to state suppression, which predicted higher emotional exhaustion and unethical pro-self behavior. Conversely, HAS was positively related to state meaning-making, which predicted lower emotional exhaustion and unethical pro-self behavior. Dispositional optimism weakened the positive association between EPDR and state suppression, whereas hypercompetitive orientation weakened the positive association between HAS and state meaning-making. These findings demonstrate that EPDR can inadvertently deplete employees and encourage unethical pro-self behavior, whereas HAS can cultivate meaning-making and protect against these harmful outcomes, contingent on employees' traits. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
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.