A German translation and adaptation of the knowledge hiding scale.

Andreas L Steiner, Victoria K E Bart, Martina Rieger

Abstract read

In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andreas L SteinerDepartment of Psychology and Sports Medicine, Institute of Psychology, UMIT TIROL - Private University for Health Sciences and Health Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Victoria K E BartDepartment of Psychology and Sports Medicine, Institute of Psychology, UMIT TIROL - Private University for Health Sciences and Health Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Martina RiegerDepartment of Psychology and Sports Medicine, Institute of Psychology, UMIT TIROL - Private University for Health Sciences and Health Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowledge hiding, defined as any deliberate act of withholding company-related knowledge from coworkers, has increasingly attracted attention in the scientific literature due to its detrimental impact on organizational performance and dynamics. Despite this growing interest, critical gaps remain regarding the reliable measurement of knowledge hiding across different languages. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to translate, validate, and adapt the knowledge hiding scale by Connelly et al. (2012) for application in German-speaking work environments. To capture different conceptualizations of knowledge hiding, two versions were developed: one situation-specific scale (corresponding to the original scale) and one situation-independent scale. The latter was designed to enable the assessment of knowledge hiding as a relatively stable behavioral tendency, independent of situational factors. Each version was examined in an independent study involving employees from the DACH region (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland;

Indexed as

German translationknowledge hidingknowledge hiding scalepsychometric propertiessituation-independent knowledge hiding scalesituation-specific knowledge hiding scale

Identifiers

PMID42293971

DOI10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1812789

PMCPMC13253693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.