Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case

Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472" }, "headline": "Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone...", "datePublished": "2024-12-03T10:37:16", "dateModified": "2024-12-03T10:37:16", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Alexey Belinskiy" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Carl Olsen" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background This study investigates the influence of perceived follower–leader congruence in basic moral behaviors, as defined by the morality-as-cooperation theory (MAC), on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Although important for the leadership theory and practice, this association is scarcely covered by the literature. Methods The study employed a mixed-methods approach, consisting of a one-site quantitative survey in Phase 1 carried out in a Russophone logistics company, and a follow-up series of semi-structured interviews within the same population in Phase 2. Results The results of Phase 1 showed a moderate positive correlation (r(54) = [.34;.64], p < .05) between perceived congruence in each MAC element and the perceived level of ethical leadership, whereas the findings from Phase 2 demonstrated that this association is causal. Moreover, the research unexpectedly revealed that the influence of the congruence in care for kin, heroism, and deference is mediated by the congruence in loyalty to the group and reciprocity, with the significance level at p < .05 for all indirect effects. The study also found a moderating role of duration of leader’s moral behavior observation by followers. Conclusions This research advances ethical leadership literature by applying the MAC theory to studying the antecedents of the perceived leaders’ ethicality and revealing the mediating role of some basic moral values in assessing a leader’s ethicality. Besides, the study contributes to the cross-cultural validity of both MAC and ethical leadership theories by testing the respective instruments in a Russophone organization. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472", "name": "Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived..." } } ] } Home Browse Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Belinskiy A and Olsen C. Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] Alexey Belinskiy https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0005-8509 1 , Carl Olsen 1 Alexey Belinskiy https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0005-8509 1 , Carl Olsen 1 PUBLISHED 03 Dec 2024 Author details Author details 1 SBS Swiss Business School, Kloten, Zurich, 8302, Switzerland Alexey Belinskiy Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Carl Olsen Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Background This study investigates the influence of perceived follower–leader congruence in basic moral behaviors, as defined by the morality-as-cooperation theory (MAC), on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Although important for the leadership theory and practice, this association is scarcely covered by the literature. Methods The study employed a mixed-methods approach, consisting of a one-site quantitative survey in Phase 1 carried out in a Russophone logistics company, and a follow-up series of semi-structured interviews within the same population in Phase 2. Results The results of Phase 1 showed a moderate positive correlation (r(54) = [.34;.64], p < .05) between perceived congruence in each MAC element and the perceived level of ethical leadership, whereas the findings from Phase 2 demonstrated that this association is causal. Moreover, the research unexpectedly revealed that the influence of the congruence in care for kin, heroism, and deference is mediated by the congruence in loyalty to the group and reciprocity, with the significance level at p < .05 for all indirect effects. The study also found a moderating role of duration of leader’s moral behavior observation by followers. Conclusions This research advances ethical leadership literature by applying the MAC theory to studying the antecedents of the perceived leaders’ ethicality and revealing the mediating role of some basic moral values in assessing a leader’s ethicality. Besides, the study contributes to the cross-cultural validity of both MAC and ethical leadership theories by testing the respective instruments in a Russophone organization. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords ethical leadership, morality-as-cooperation, value congruence, moral values, moral behavior, perceived ethicality Corresponding Author(s) Alexey Belinskiy ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Alexey Belinskiy Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2024 Belinskiy A and Olsen C. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Belinskiy A and Olsen C. Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 ) First published: 03 Dec 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 ) Latest published: 03 Dec 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 ) Introduction The emphasis on ethical behavior in organizational circumstances and its specific relevance to leadership practice was fueled by corporate scandals at the beginning of this century ( Hoch, Bommer, Dulebohn, & Wu, 2018 ; Northouse, 2019 ). However, researchers differ substantially on their understanding of what exactly should be considered as ethical or moral ( Westra & Andrews, 2022 ). Despite the claim that no universal ethics for humanity exists due to the dependence of ethics on cultural contexts ( Wong, 1984 ), the recent developments in evolutionary moral psychology have offered various accounts of the moral basics that underlie the whole variety of ethics and morality that emerge in various circumstances ( Curry, 2016 ; DeScioli, 2016 ; Haidt & Joseph 2004 ; Rai & Fiske, 2011 ; Schein & Gray, 2018 ). Recent literature stresses the importance of knowledge about antecedents of followers’ perception of a leader as ethical, and points to the lack of empirical research in this field ( Banks, Fischer, Gooty, & Stock, 2021 ; Brown & Treviño, 2014 ). Given that a positive influence of such a perception on the group’s outcomes has been covered by numerous papers ( Bedi, Alpaslan, & Green, 2016 ), the knowledge of factors influencing the perceived level of ethical leadership turns out to be a valuable tool for ethical leaders aiming to enhance the outcomes. Congruence in basic moral values Paraphrasing Edwards and Cable’s (2009) definition of values, personal moral values may be specified as general beliefs about morally acceptable and desirable behaviors or end states. Hayes, Pankey and Gregg (2002) argue that personal value congruence occurs when someone’s behavior corresponds with self-attributed values. This entails the importance of moral value congruence for ethical assessment of leaders’ behaviors. Banks et al. (2021) posit that the congruence of leaders’ behavioral signals, such as prosocial values, with their followers’ moral identities, which is defined by Wang and Hackett (2020) as sets of self-associated moral values, determines their evaluation as ethical or unethical. However, while the association of value congruence with ethical leadership has been addressed by recent publications, there is still a scarcity of empirical studies on this subject ( Peng & Lin, 2017 ). More specifically, few studies focus on follower–leader moral value congruence as a factor influencing followers’ ethical evaluation, including Egorov, Kalshoven, Pircher Verdorfer, and Peus (2020) and Pircher Verdorfer and Peus (2020) , and neither provide empirical evidence of causality. This research aims to provide such evidence by a one-site mixed-method inquiry to the follower–leader congruence in moral values as a causal antecedent of followers’ moral evaluation of ethical leaders’ behaviors. Morality-as-cooperation: Basic moral behaviors Moral judgment on a leader’s behavior employs various criteria, either rational or irrational, and conscious or unconscious ( Alfano, 2022 ; Haidt, 2012 ). Curry (2016) proposed the morality-as-cooperation (MAC) theory, which posits that morality represents a set of typical solutions for the cooperation problems that humanity has faced in our species’ history. Intra-group interactions and gene–culture co-evolution have led to the adoption of such solutions and their conceptualization as morally acceptable behaviors ( Tomasello, 2016 ; Buchanan, 2020 ). Curry (2016) argues that they correspond to the cooperative games studied by game theory, which involve such behavioral strategies as care for kin, loyalty to the group, reciprocal exchange, dominance and heroism, deference and submission, fairness in dividing disputed resources, and respect to prior possession ( Table 1 ). These behaviors are thus widely considered moral ( Curry, 2016 ), and turn out to be universally morally relevant to all cultures across the globe ( Alfano, Cheong, & Curry, 2022 ; Curry, Mullins, & Whiterhouse, 2019b ). Table 1. Wording alternatives for MAC elements. # Short name Wording alternatives 1 Kin care Care for kin, obligations to family, family values, kinship altruism 2 Group Loyalty to the group, coordination for mutual advantage, mutualism 3 Reciprocity Social exchange, tit-for-tat, conditional cooperation 4 Heroism Bravery, hawkish behavior, display of dominance 5 Deference Respect to hierarchy, dove-ish behavior, display of submission 6 Fairness Division of resources, compromise, negotiation 7 Property Respect to prior possession, respect for property rights According to Curry, Alfano, Brandt, and Pelican’s (2021) suggestion, the MAC basic moral behaviors, or MAC values, represent basic elements of human morality, that, taken in various combinations, can possibly constitute any known moral value. Assuming this hypothesis on morality as a combinatorial system as true, the appreciation of basic moral behaviors should be present in any moral assessment, and if a leader’s behavior demonstrates adherence to those basic moral elements, then it should be evaluated as ethical. Summarizing the above, Curry and his colleagues suggest that basic cooperative moral values represent the culturally universal basis of morality, in whatever values it may be explicitly expressed or implicitly perceived. Hence, the MAC basic moral values can serve as culturally universal criteria for moral evaluation of a leader. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore whether congruence in MAC basic moral elements causally influences the evaluation of a leader as ethical, which, to the knowledge of the authors, has not been covered by empirical research so far. Cross-cultural perspective The two main studies on cross-cultural universality of MAC values ( Alfano et al., 2022 ; Curry, Mullins, & Whiterhouse, 2019b ) were based on anthropological sources written in English. They noted this as a limitation, and thus suggested testing the MAC in various languages and cultural contexts as an avenue for further research. Russian-speaking organizations is one of such non-English cultural contexts, the application to which can provide a valuable contribution to the cross-cultural validity of the theory. The Russophone diaspora is one of the world’s largest ( Ryazantsev, 2015 ), which spreads beyond the post-Soviet area. In some Western countries such as the United States, Germany, and Israel, the Russophones have formed extensive well-established communities hundreds of thousands or millions strong that continue to use Russian for informal and formal business communications ( Zabrodskaya & Ivanova, 2021 ). However, notwithstanding the topic’s importance, a literature search returns no studies on the MAC applied to the Russophone groups. Similarly, there is a scarcity of studies on ethical leadership in the Russophone cultural context. Therefore, the application of both these theories in a Russian-speaking organization was expected to offer important contributions to both fields. Therefore, to close the gap identified above, the following research question (RQ) has been posed: Does the perceived follower–leader congruence in MAC basic moral elements causally influence the perceived level of ethical leadership in the Russophone language context? Method The expected answer to the RQ depends on the results of testing for two research hypotheses. First, the association hypothesis RH1: The relationship between perceived follower–leader congruence in any of the MAC elements (X n ) and perceived level of ethical leadership (Y) is statistically significant. If confirmed, the causality hypothesis RH2 should be tested: The influence of perceived follower–leader congruence in any of the MAC elements on the perceived level of ethical leadership (X n →Y) is causal. The conceptual model is depicted in Figure 1 . Figure 1. Conceptual model. The figure depicts the conceptual framework to be tested on association and causality. H n stand for hypotheses alternative to the null hypotheses outlined in Table 9 . a Each X n signifies perceived congruence in respective MAC elements drawn from Curry (2016) . b Y stands for perceived ethical leadership construct suggested by Brown, Treviño, and Harrison (2005) . Discussing the methodological issues of causal inference in empirical research, Maxwell (2004) advocates a realist approach, which recognizes the validity of both positivist and interpretivist methods, and suggests ways of allowing for causality inference in a single-setting design, such as, for example, triangulation of quantitative and comparative qualitative data. Thus, this research was structured as a two-phase mixed-method study: the quantitative cross-sectional testing of the relationships’ significance and differences in means, and the follow-up qualitative cross-sectional inquiry into causality of findings from the first phase. As the cross-sectional design was chosen due to the limited time frame for sampling provided by the sampled company, a survey with a subsequent quantitative analysis was conducted for testing RH1. Given the limited accuracy of possible causality inferences in a quantitative cross-sectional inquiry, a follow-up qualitative study is required for the exploration of causal relationships stated by RH2 ( Gelfand, Mensinger, & Tenhave, 2009 ; MacKinnon, Fairchild, & Fritz, 2007 ). Thus, as a Phase 2, a series of semi-structured interviews were performed. Ethics statement For Quantitative Phase 1, the study addressed confidentiality and anonymity by obtaining informed consent from all participants. Participants consented by checking a relevant box in the web form prior to starting answering questions. The consent was recorded and documented as per ethical guidelines. No data that could identify specific participants was collected, and the company received results only in aggregated form to ensure that individual identities were protected. The consent procedure and data handling process received prior approval from the SBS Swiss Business School Ethical Committee, in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki’s principles. The date of approval is September 2, 2022, while the data collection was performed between 16 and 19 of September, 2022. For Qualitative Phase 2, participants provided written consent, confirmed orally at the beginning of each interview. Data were anonymized personally by the researchers, and only anonymized data were used in the report. To ensure the company did not incur any damage and to maintain transparency, the approval of the CEO and HR Director was obtained before engaging with any employees. The results were presented to the company in an aggregated format, so that participants’ identities cannot be revealed in any circumstances. The procedures and the use of consent were reviewed and approved by the SBS Swiss Business School Ethical Committee. The date of approval is December 7, 2022, while the data collection spanned from 07 till 26 of December 2022. No material incentive was offered or provided to any participant. All participants were informed of the study’s purpose, methods, and potential risks and benefits. They were made aware that participation was voluntary, and they could withdraw at any time without any consequences. All data collected during this study were handled confidentially and stored securely on encrypted password-protected hard-disk of the researcher’s computer, and will be retained for five years before being destroyed. This process ensured adherence to the principles of autonomy and respect for participants as stated in the Declaration of Helsinki. Phase 1: Method and procedures The questionnaire was composed of items used in previous research. Two relevant instruments, presented below in detail, were drawn from the literature. Measurement of perceived congruence in the MAC elements For the measurement of the seven basic moral behaviors suggested by MAC theory, Curry, Chesters, and Van Lissa (2019a) designed and validated the 42-item Morality-as-Cooperation Questionnaire (MAC-Q). Whereas MAC-Q measures perceived values themselves, the present research is aimed to measure perceived congruence on these values. Thus, the instrument’s introductory messages were modified in order to measure followers’ perceived congruence in basic moral elements with those of the leader’s, while the items themselves were left identical to those from the original questionnaire. Measurement of the perceived ethical leadership The literature suggests numerous approaches to measuring ethical leadership, which vary depending on the philosophical angle on ethics, focal respondents, and differences in the construct aspects that are intended to be measured (see for example Langlois, Lapointe, Valois, & de Leeuw, 2014 ; Kalshoven, Den Hartog, & De Hoogh, 2011 ; Riggio, Zhu, Reina, & Maroosis, 2010 ; Spangenberg & Theron, 2005 ; Yukl, Mahsud, Hassan, & Prussia, 2013 ). The majority of those instruments are in line with Brown et al.’s (2005) approach in assessing ethical leadership as a specific behavioral practice, though enhancing it in certain aspects. Meanwhile, the Ethical Leadership Scale (ELS) suggested by Brown and colleagues represents one of the most frequently used in empirical research of ethical leadership ( Bedi et al., 2016 ). For this reason, this study considers the ELS as the most appropriate instrument for the empirical advancement of Brown et al.’s (2005) conceptualization of ethical leadership. The questionnaire measuring scales The questionnaire employed in the survey was therefore composed of two instruments: the ELS and the modified versions of the MAC-Q Relevance and Judgment scales, denoted as mMAC-Q(R) and mMAC-Q(J) scales in this study ( Table 2 ). Besides this, such demographic variables as gender, age and organizational level were collected in order to test between-group differences in responses. All non-demographic questionnaire’s items were measured using a 5-point Likert-type response range. Although numerous papers insist on better reliability of 7-point scales compared to 5-point scales (see for review Taherdoost, 2019 ), some others argue that the difference in reliability is insufficient, and 5-point scales are less confusing and easier to respond ( Aybek & Toraman, 2022 ; Babakus & Mangold, 1992 ). Using this assumption, this research employed 5-point scale to be easier to read and understand from mobile screens by respondents, thereby helping them to avoid being overwhelmed when picking answers, which can more probably occur with a wider response scale. Table 2. Variables, scales and items of the survey. Var # Variable name Short name Scale Var. label Items X 1 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Care for kin” a Congruence in kin care mMAC-Q(R) rK rk1, rk2, rk3 mMAC-Q (J) jK jk1, jk2, jk3 X 2 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Loyalty to the group” a Congruence in group loyalty mMAC-Q(R) rG rg1, rg2, rg3 mMAC-Q(J) jG jg1, jg2, jg3 X 3 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Reciprocal exchange” a Congruence in reciprocity mMAC-Q(R) rR rr1, rr2, rr3 mMAC-Q(J) jR jr1, jr2, jr3 X 4 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Display of dominance” a Congruence in heroism mMAC-Q(R) rH rh1, rh2, rh3 mMAC-Q(J) jH jh1, jh2, jh3 X 5 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Display of deference” a Congruence in deference mMAC-Q(R) rD rd1, rd2, rd3 mMAC-Q(J) jD jd1, jd2, jd3 X 6 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Fairness” a Congruence in fairness mMAC-Q(R) rF rf1, rf2, rf3 mMAC-Q(J) jF jf1, jf2, jf3 X 7 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Respect to prior possession” a Congruence in respect to property mMAC-Q(R) rP rp1, rp2, rp3 mMAC-Q(J) jP jp1, jp2, jp3 Y Perceived level of ethical leadership b Ethical leadership Ethical Leadership Scale pELS el1, el2, el3, el4, el5, el6, el7, el8, el9, el10 a Names within quotation marks are drawn from Curry (2016) . b The term is drawn from Brown et al. (2005) . The composed questionnaire was translated into Russian. The correctness of the items’ translation was checked by reverse-translation involving third-party translators. Then, a review of the instrument’s form and content was carried out by running a questionnaire among a private Russian HR community in order to ensure that the overall composition of the questionnaire was easy to use, the Russian wording of the items was clear to the respondents, and there was no misperception of the constructs which were supposed to be measured. After final wording amendments, the resulting instrument was exhibited at Google Forms platform for sampling. Population and sampling The survey was conducted in a Russian logistics company (hereinafter the company). The total number of employees is 1319 located in various regions of Russia, among which 263 work in the Moscow headquarters, which was chosen as a sampling site following the company’s management requirements. However, although the behavioral patterns of the regional branches’ employees theoretically may differ from those of the Moscow HQ due to possible cultural differences between different regions of Russia, this limitation was considered negligible for the generalization of the results to the whole company, and wider to the people employed in the industrial sector of the Russian economy, as the substantial part of headquarters’ employees moved to Moscow from various regions and industries, according to the company’s management statement. No respondents were deliberately chosen for the participation by management or the researcher, and the entire process was voluntary and open to any participant. To that extent, the selection was random, although the choice of the company and its headquarters utilized convenience sampling. The emails contained an introductory message motivating employees to participate in the survey were sent to all HQ employees, and provided a link to the questionnaire’s web-form. Confidentiality and anonymity issues were addressed thoroughly, as outlined below in the Ethics and Consent section. Fifty six responses were received ( Belinskiy & Olsen, 2024 ). The response rate was therefore 56/263, or 21 percent. Participation was voluntary, responses were anonymous, and there were no repetitive patterns of answers on any scales . Therefore, all responses (n = 56) were considered to have been made sincerely and consciously, and thus valid. Following Fritz and MacKinnon’s (2007) recommendations, a minimal required sample size should not be less 33 for valid regression analysis, so the actual sample size (n = 56) was found sufficient. Reliability and validity of the questionnaire The amendment of the original MAC-Q in introductory messages changed the constructs being measured, and hence the validity of the instrument had to be verified. The initial measurement model was tested for a model fit using SPSS Amos 29 package in order to assess whether it fitted the dataset and was good in predictive capacity. CFA initially resulted in poor fit of all models combined from the MAC-Q items ( Table 3 ), in contrast to good fit demonstrated by the initial MAC-Q Relevance and Judgment scales ( Curry, Chesters, & Van Lissa, 2019a ). After removal of lower-loading factors and factors demonstrating the most salient levels of standardized residual covariance with those of other items, the best model fit was achieved when each of seven MAC constructs had been reduced to two items from the Relevance scale ( Figure 2 ): All factor loadings were above .70 and all model-fit values (CMIN Sig. .156, CFI .985, TLI .975, RMSEA .059, RMSEA 90%CI [.000, .107], PCLOSE .380) are close to levels commonly accepted in the literature as good-fit measures ( Schreiber, Nora, Stage, Barlow, & King, 2006 ; Ullman, 2006 ); only the upper bound of RMSEA CI .107 exceeds Schreiber et al.’s threshold .08 ( Table 4 ). This model (hereinafter Model A’, mMAC-Q, or the MAC section of the instrument), was employed for the following reliability and validity analysis. Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis of the modified MAC-Q scales. Model fit criteria Good fit reference values a Model A 7 Relevance 3-item scales Model B 7 Judgment 3-item scales Model C 7 combined 6-item scales Model D 14 separate 3-item scales CMIN 391 417 2386 1977 df 168 168 798 728 χ 2 /df ≤2 2.327 2.481 2.990 2.716 CMIN Sig. >0.05 .000 .000 .000 .000 CFI ≥.95 .813 .712 .459 .574 TLI rho2 ≥.95 .767 .640 .416 .496 RMSEA <0.06 .155 .164 .190 .177 RMSEA low 90% CI .000 .135 .144 .181 .167 RMSEA high 90% CI 0.05 .000 .000 .000 .000 a Good fit reference values drawn from Schreiber et al. (2006) , and Ullman (2006) . Figure 2. Model A’: The Modified MAC-Q CFA. The figure represents the structural equation model for the best fitting model A’. It is generated using IBM SPSS Amos 29 software when performing CFA. Circles “X1” – “X7” represent latent variables standing for basic moral behaviors ( Curry, 2016 ). Squares like “rk3” represent observed variables correspondent to the respective questionnaire items ( Table 2 ). Ellipses denoted like “e3” represent errors, or the variance in the observed variable that is not explained by the latent variable. The single-headed arrows indicate regression weights or factor loadings from one variable to another. The double-headed arrows represent correlations or covariances between latent variables. The numbers next to these arrows show the correlation values between different latent variables. Table 4. Comparison of reduced models’ fit. Model fit criteria Reference values a Model A’ 2-item R-scales Model B’ 2-item J-scales Model C’ 2-item mixed CMIN (χ 2 ) 66.65 105.76 72.07 df 56 56 56 χ 2 /df ≤2 1.190 1.889 1.287 CMIN significance >0.05 .156 .000 .073 CFI ≥.95 .985 .903 .976 TLI rho2 ≥.95 .975 .842 .961 RMSEA <0.06 .059 .127 .072 RMSEA low 90% CI .000 .000 .089 .000 RMSEA high 90% CI 0.05 .380 .001 .232 a Reference values drawn from Schreiber et al. (2006) , and Ullman (2006) . Each scale showed a Cronbach’s alpha within a range between .83 and .90, which represents a good level of internal consistency according to Taber’s (2018) review. The composite reliability value for each scale ranged from .83 to .91, exceeding the .70 threshold suggested by Hair, Ortinau, and Harrison (2010) . Therefore, each construct in the reduced model was found reliable. Pairwise correlations within each construct are positive and statistically significant (r > .70, p < .001) for all X n1 –X n2 within-construct pairs ( Table 5 ). Each scale’s average variance-extracted value (AVE) exceeds the threshold .50 ( Table 6 ) suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981) . Thus, the scales of the reduced instrument demonstrate sufficient convergent validity. Table 5. Item Pairwise Pearson’s r. Item rk2 rk3 rg2 rg3 rr1 rr3 rh2 rh3 rd1 rd3 rf1 rf2 rp1 rp2 rk2 r 1 .74 a .72 .55 .66 .66 .63 .66 .60 .68 .33 .38 .30 .27 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .013 .004 .027 .045 rk3 r .74 a 1 .68 .48 .63 .70 .59 .60 .63 .64 .36 .30 .29 .20 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .006 .024 .028 .145 rg2 r .72 .68 1 .71 a .87 .85 .71 .71 .71 .70 .26 .33 .15 .11 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .051 .012 .267 .404 rg3 r .55 .48 .71 a 1 .77 .75 .69 .58 .57 .50 .18 .27 .27 .19 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .178 .043 .048 .165 rr1 r .66 .63 .87 .77 1 .80 a .68 .63 .68 .64 .27 .31 .10 .18 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .046 .019 .476 .186 rr3 r .66 .70 .85 .75 .80 a 1 .71 .71 .73 .67 .32 .35 .24 .22 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .015 .009 .075 .099 rh2 r .63 .59 .71 .69 .68 .71 1 .78 a .64 .65 .51 .49 .43 .48 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .000 rh3 r .66 .60 .71 .58 .63 .71 .78 a 1 .64 .62 .44 .41 .27 .32 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .002 .047 .017 rd1 r .60 .63 .71 .57 .68 .73 .64 .64 1 .76 a .36 .38 .28 .31 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .007 .004 .039 .019 rd3 r .68 .64 .70 .50 .64 .67 .65 .62 .76 a 1 .43 .38 .29 .33 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .004 .029 .013 rf1 r .33 .36 .26 .18 .27 .32 .51 .44 .36 .43 1 .82 a .62 .83 Sig. .013 .006 .051 .178 .046 .015 .000 .001 .007 .001 .000 .000 .000 rf2 r .38 .30 .33 .27 .31 .35 .49 .41 .38 .38 .82 a 1 .56 .69 Sig. .004 .024 .012 .043 .019 .009 .000 .002 .004 .004 .000 .000 .000 rp1 r .30 .29 .15 .27 .10 .24 .43 .27 .28 .29 .62 .56 1 .74 a Sig. .027 .028 .267 .048 .476 .075 .001 .047 .039 .029 .000 .000 .000 rp2 r .27 .20 .11 .19 .18 .22 .48 .32 .31 .33 .83 .69 .74 a 1 Sig. .045 .145 .404 .165 .186 .099 .000 .017 .019 .013 .000 .000 .000 a Intra-construct correlation. Table 6. Average variance extracted. rK rG rR rH rD rF rP AVE .74 .72 .80 .78 .76 .83 .79 Sqrt .86 .85 .90 .89 .87 .91 .89 The discriminant validity was assessed according to Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) criterion, implying that the square root of the scale’s AVE should exceed its correlation with other items in the model. This criterion was met for all items except the second item in “loyalty to the group” scale, which returned slightly negative differences between AVE square root and correlations with first and second items in “reciprocity” scale: -.02 and -.01 respectively ( Table 7 ). Table 7. Discriminant validity: HTMT ratio. X 1 :rK X 2 :rG X 3 :rR X 4 :rH X 5 :rD X 6 :rF X 1 :rK X 2 :rG .98 X 3 :rR 1.00 1.23 X 4 :rH .96 1.04 1.05 X 5 :rD 1.00 .97 1.06 .99 X 6 :rF .51 a .39 a .47 a .70 a .58 a X 7 :rP .42 a .28 a .29 a .59 a .48 a 1.07 a Satisfactory HTMT test. Therefore, the modified MAC-Q Relevance scale reduced to two items per each MAC-related construct, or mMAC-Q, was considered a valid instrument for measuring follower–leader perceived congruence in MAC elements. All data related to skipped or removed items was not taken into account in further analysis. Therefore, while the unchanged MAC-Q section of the instrument failed to demonstrate good model fit, the modified mMAC-Q section represents a valid and coherent model for measuring perceived congruence in MAC elements in Russian. Similarly to the mMAC-Q section, the ELS scale demonstrated a high rate of internal consistency (α = .92). The EFA and CFA analyses confirmed Brown et al.’s (2005) argument that perceived ethical leadership measured by the 10-item ELS represents a coherent construct. The EFA returned a one-factor model with an eigenvalue of 5.96, so that 59.6 percent of variance is explained by one factor with the factor loading ranged from .483 to .894 per item. The CFA returned good model fit for the scale (CMIN Sig .326, CFI .990, TLI .987, RMSEA .041, RMSEA 90%CI [.000, .108], PCLOSE .538); hence, the original Brown et al.’s (2005) ELS was employed for further inferential analysis as a uni-dimensional measure of the Y variable. The content validity of the Russian-worded items was qualitatively addressed in Phase 2, resulting in support for claims of Curry, Chesters, and Van Lissa (2019a) and Brown et al. (2005) . Hence, the instrument is viewed as a valid instrument to measure the perceived level of ethical leadership in Russian-language contexts. Phase 1: Results Descriptive statistics Among 56 responses, 34 participants were female and 22 were male. All the participants were adults, eight of them between 18 and 30 years old, 40 between 31 and 45, and the remaining eight within the 46 and 60 age range. A total of 18 responses were collected from those who received link one, 14 followed link two, and 24 received link three, which implies each response allocated to the corresponding organizational layer ( Table 8 ). Table 8. Descriptive statistics of means across each scale. N Min Max Mean Std. Dev. Skewness Kurtosis Statistic Statistic Std. Err Statistic Std. Err pELS 56 2.80 5.00 3.86 .57 .26 .32 -.48 .63 rK 56 3.00 5.00 3.72 .80 .53 .32 -1.35 .63 rG 56 2.00 5.00 3.86 .77 -.06 .32 -.94 .63 rR 56 2.00 5.00 3.89 .81 .02 .32 -1.14 .63 rH 56 2.50 5.00 3.72 .74 .38 .32 -1.20 .63 rD 56 3.00 5.00 3.80 .72 .32 .32 -1.23 .63 rF 56 1.00 5.00 3.31 .82 -.10 .32 .75 .63 rP 56 1.00 5.00 3.38 1.03 -.04 .32 -.27 .63 Raw Likert integer values were transformed to continuous values by calculating the mean of the array of values corresponding to each scale of the instrument, thus forming the data-set for the statistical tests. Initial responses were coded as follows: strictly negative responses were coded as 1, strictly positive as 5, with a neutral point at 3. The means above 3, therefore, demonstrate the evidence of the perceived congruence in MAC elements in the case of independent variables, and perceived ethical leadership in the case of dependent one. The results demonstrate the perception of all MAC elements as congruent with the leader (3.31 < M < 3.89), and perception of the leadership as ethical (M = 3.86). The data were considered as normally distributed with skewness [-.10, .53] and excess kurtosis [-1.35, .75] intervals close to those proposed by Gravetter, Wallnau, Forzano, and Witnauer (2020) for normal distributions ( Table 8 ). Association hypothesis test Seven null hypotheses were posed for the quantitative test ( Table 9 ). The results demonstrated that all means of follower–leader perceived congruence, in each MAC element, correlate with perceived ethical leadership, with Pearson r(54) values ranging from .34 to .59 and significance level at p < .001, except those for “fairness” and “property” scales, which are significant at p < .05 and < .01 respectively ( Table 10 ). Regression analyses stress the argument for the rejection of all null hypotheses ( Table 11 ). Thus, the results were considered to show a statistically significant moderate positive linear correlation for each X n –Y pair using Ratner’s (2009) criteria, which supports the RH1, meaning that there is a statistically significant relationship between perceived follower–leader congruence in each MAC element and the perceived level of ethical leadership ( Table 22 ). Table 9. List of null hypotheses. # Null hypothesis H1 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Care for kin” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H2 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Loyalty to the group” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H3 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Reciprocal exchange” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H4 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Display of dominance” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H5 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Display of deference” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H6 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Fairness” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. H7 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Respect to prior possession” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Table 10. Pearson’s r. Variable 1 Variable 2 Correlation Count Sig. Lower CI Upper CI rK pELS .59 56 .000 .38 .74 rG pELS .64 56 .000 .45 .77 rR pELS .62 56 .000 .43 .76 rH pELS .59 56 .000 .39 .74 rD pELS .47 56 .000 .23 .65 rF pELS .34 56 .011 .08 .55 rP pELS .40 56 .002 .16 .60 Table 11. Linear regression analysis. IV Equation Model summary Parameter estimates R 2 F df1 df2 Sig. Constant b1 rK Linear .34 28.15 1 54 .000 2.30 .42 rG Linear .41 36.94 1 54 .000 2.03 .47 rR Linear .39 34.42 1 54 .000 2.16 .44 rH Linear .35 29.27 1 54 .000 2.17 .45 rD Linear .22 15.10 1 54 .000 2.46 .37 rF Linear .11 6.98 1 54 .011 3.08 .23 rP Linear .16 10.58 1 54 .002 3.10 .22 Moderating effect of organizational layer It was expected that this association may be demographic sensitive, which means that age, gender, or organizational level may interfere between congruence in some MAC values and the perceived level of ethical leadership. To control for demographics, the difference in means between various population groups was assessed. However, tests for the equality of means between gender ( Table 12 ) and age ( Table 14 ) groups failed to demonstrate statistically significant differences between means of these groups ( Table 13 ; Table 15 ). Table 12. Descriptive statistics for gender groups. Variable Gender N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error Mean pELS Male 22 3.93 .63 .13 Female 34 3.81 .53 .09 rK Male 22 3.75 .74 .16 Female 34 3.71 .84 .14 rG Male 22 3.93 .74 .16 Female 34 3.81 .79 .14 rR Male 22 3.86 .80 .17 Female 34 3.91 .83 .14 rH Male 22 3.75 .65 .14 Female 34 3.71 .81 .14 rD Male 22 3.80 .61 .13 Female 34 3.81 .80 .14 rF Male 22 3.18 .99 .21 Female 34 3.40 .69 .12 rP Male 22 3.43 1.17 .25 Female 34 3.35 .95 .16 Table 13. Independent samples T-test for the equality of means between gender groups. Variable Variances assumed t df Significance Mean Diff. Std. Error 95% CI of the Difference One-Sided p Two-Sided p Lower Upper pELS Equal .75 54 .229 .458 .12 .16 -.20 .43 Non-equal .72 39.44 .238 .476 .12 .16 -.21 .45 rK Equal .20 54 .421 .842 .04 .22 -.40 .49 Non-equal .21 49.28 .419 .837 .04 .21 -.39 .47 rG Equal .58 54 .281 .563 .12 .21 -.30 .55 Non-equal .59 46.82 .279 .558 .12 .21 -.30 .54 rR Equal -.21 54 .415 .831 -.05 .22 -.50 .40 Non-equal -.22 46.00 .415 .830 -.05 .22 -.50 .40 rH Equal .21 54 .415 .831 .04 .21 -.37 .46 Non-equal .23 51.34 .411 .823 .04 .20 -.35 .44 rD Equal -.07 54 .473 .947 -.01 .20 -.41 .39 Non-equal -.07 52.36 .472 .944 -.01 .19 -.39 .37 rF Equal -.95 54 .172 .344 -.22 .23 -.67 .24 Non-equal -.89 34.16 .191 .382 -.22 .24 -.71 .28 rP Equal .28 54 .391 .783 .08 .28 -.49 .65 Non-equal .27 38.35 .396 .792 .08 .30 -.52 .68 Table 14. Descriptive statistics for age groups. Var. Age N Mean Std. Dev. Std. Err. 95% CI for Mean Lower bound Upper bound pELS 18–30 8 3.79 .58 .20 3.31 4.27 31–45 40 3.89 .57 .09 3.71 4.07 46–60 8 3.80 .64 .23 3.27 4.33 Total 56 3.86 .57 .08 3.71 4.01 rK 18–30 8 3.88 .99 .35 3.05 4.70 31–45 40 3.70 .80 .13 3.44 3.96 46–60 8 3.69 .65 .23 3.14 4.23 Total 56 3.72 .80 .11 3.51 3.94 rG 18–30 8 4.06 .78 .27 3.41 4.71 31–45 40 3.80 .76 .12 3.56 4.04 46–60 8 3.94 .86 .31 3.22 4.66 Total 56 3.86 .77 .10 3.65 4.06 rR 18–30 8 4.25 .89 .31 3.51 4.99 31–45 40 3.80 .78 .12 3.55 4.05 46–60 8 4.00 .89 .31 3.26 4.74 Total 56 3.89 .81 .11 3.68 4.11 rH 18–30 8 3.50 .53 .19 3.05 3.95 31–45 40 3.75 .81 .13 3.49 4.01 46–60 8 3.81 .59 .21 3.32 4.31 Total 56 3.72 .74 .10 3.52 3.92 rD 18–30 8 3.81 .65 .23 3.27 4.36 31–45 40 3.79 .79 .13 3.53 4.04 46–60 8 3.88 .44 .16 3.50 4.25 Total 56 3.80 .72 .10 3.61 4.00 rF 18–30 8 3.13 .64 .23 2.59 3.66 31–45 40 3.40 .81 .13 3.14 3.66 46–60 8 3.06 1.05 .37 2.18 3.94 Total 56 3.31 .82 .11 3.09 3.53 rP 18–30 8 3.19 .92 .33 2.42 3.96 31–45 40 3.41 1.02 .16 3.09 3.74 46–60 8 3.44 1.29 .46 2.36 4.52 Total 56 3.38 1.03 .14 3.11 3.66 Table 15. ANOVA test for the equality of means between age groups. Variable Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. pELS Between Groups .101 2 .051 .151 .861 Within Groups 17.793 53 .336 Total 17.894 55 rK Between Groups .216 2 .108 .165 .848 Within Groups 34.744 53 .656 Total 34.960 55 rG Between Groups .520 2 .260 .433 .651 Within Groups 31.838 53 .601 Total 32.357 55 rR Between Groups 1.457 2 .729 1.106 .338 Within Groups 34.900 53 .658 Total 36.357 55 rH Between Groups .491 2 .246 .434 .650 Within Groups 29.969 53 .565 Total 30.460 55 rD Between Groups .052 2 .026 .048 .953 Within Groups 28.788 53 .543 Total 28.839 55 rF Between Groups 1.088 2 .544 .796 .456 Within Groups 36.194 53 .683 Total 37.281 55 rP Between Groups .364 2 .182 .166 .847 Within Groups 58.131 53 1.097 Total 58.496 55 In comparison, a one-way ANOVA demonstrated that the difference in means between the top-management team (n = 18), middle management (n = 14), and lower-level staff (n = 24) is statistically significant for any variable at p < .001 ( Table 16 ; Table 17 ). A post-hoc pairwise Tukey HSD test showed that each variable demonstrated difference in means between top-management and two other organizational levels at least at p < .01 in all cases, except the difference in congruence in “fairness” significant at p = .021 ( Table 18 ). Meanwhile, neither comparison of variable means between mid- and lower-layers provided sufficient evidence of such a difference (p > 0.05). The mean differences between top-management and two other groups were all positive and fell into the range between .61 and 1.29, which signifies that each variable demonstrated a higher mean rate when assessed by top managers than when assessed by employees from other organizational layers. Table 16. Descriptive statistics of organizational level groups. Var Org. level N Mean Std.Dev. Std.Err. 95%CI Lower 95%CI Upper pELS Top 18 4.39 .48 .11 4.16 4.63 Mid 14 3.65 .46 .12 3.38 3.92 Low 24 3.58 .40 .08 3.42 3.75 Total 56 3.86 .57 .08 3.71 4.01 rK Top 18 4.33 .71 .17 3.98 4.68 Mid 14 3.18 .32 .08 3.00 3.36 Low 24 3.58 .78 .16 3.26 3.91 Total 56 3.72 .80 .11 3.51 3.94 rG Top 18 4.47 .47 .11 4.24 4.71 Mid 14 3.39 .71 .19 2.98 3.80 Low 24 3.67 .70 .14 3.37 3.96 Total 56 3.86 .77 .10 3.65 4.06 rR Top 18 4.58 .58 .14 4.30 4.87 Mid 14 3.32 .61 .16 2.97 3.67 Low 24 3.71 .72 .15 3.40 4.01 Total 56 3.89 .81 .11 3.68 4.11 rH Top 18 4.44 .59 .14 4.15 4.74 Mid 14 3.21 .51 .14 2.92 3.51 Low 24 3.48 .54 .11 3.25 3.71 Total 56 3.72 .74 .10 3.52 3.92 rD Top 18 4.36 .61 .14 4.06 4.67 Mid 14 3.39 .59 .16 3.05 3.74 Low 24 3.63 .63 .13 3.36 3.89 Total 56 3.80 .72 .10 3.61 4.00 rF Top 18 3.86 .98 .23 3.37 4.35 Mid 14 2.71 .58 .15 2.38 3.05 Low 24 3.25 .51 .10 3.03 3.47 Total 56 3.31 .82 .11 3.09 3.53 rP Top 18 4.11 1.21 .28 3.51 4.71 Mid 14 2.82 .64 .17 2.45 3.19 Low 24 3.17 .76 .16 2.85 3.49 Total 56 3.38 1.03 .14 3.11 3.66 Table 17. ANOVA test for the equality of means between organizational level groups. Var Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. pELS Between Groups 7.60 2 3.80 19.55 .000 Within Groups 10.30 53 .19 Total 17.89 55 rK Between Groups 11.32 2 5.66 12.69 .000 Within Groups 23.64 53 .45 Total 34.96 55 rG Between Groups 10.70 2 5.35 13.09 .000 Within Groups 21.66 53 .41 Total 32.36 55 rR Between Groups 13.97 2 6.99 16.54 .000 Within Groups 22.39 53 .42 Total 36.36 55 rH Between Groups 14.42 2 7.21 23.82 .000 Within Groups 16.04 53 .30 Total 30.46 55 rD Between Groups 8.72 2 4.36 11.49 .000 Within Groups 20.12 53 .38 Total 28.84 55 rF Between Groups 10.52 2 5.26 10.42 .000 Within Groups 26.76 53 .50 Total 37.28 55 rP Between Groups 15.08 2 7.54 9.21 .000 Within Groups 43.41 53 .82 Total 58.50 55 Table 18. Post-hoc Pairwise Tukey HSD test of differences. Var. Group (I) Group (J) Mean diff. (I-J) Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval Lower bound Upper bound pELS Top Mid .74 * .16 .000 .37 1.12 Low .81 * .14 .000 .48 1.14 Mid Top -.74 * .16 .000 -1.12 -.37 Low .07 .15 .895 -.29 .42 Low Top -.81 * .14 .000 -1.14 -.48 Mid -.07 .15 .895 -.42 .29 rK Top Mid 1.15 * .24 .000 .58 1.73 Low .75 * .21 .002 .25 1.25 Mid Top -1.15 * .24 .000 -1.73 -.58 Low -.40 .22 .179 -.95 .14 Low Top -.75 * .21 .002 -1.25 -.25 Mid .40 .22 .179 -.14 .95 rG Top Mid 1.08 * .23 .000 .53 1.63 Low .81 * .20 .000 .32 1.29 Mid Top -1.08 * .23 .000 -1.63 -.53 Low -.27 .21 .416 -.79 .24 Low Top -.81 * .20 .000 -1.29 -.32 Mid .27 .21 .416 -.24 .79 rR Top Mid 1.26 * .23 .000 .70 1.82 Low .88 * .20 .000 .39 1.36 Mid Top -1.26 * .23 .000 -1.82 -.70 Low -.39 .22 .189 -.91 .14 Low Top -.88 * .20 .000 -1.36 -.39 Mid .39 .22 .189 -.14 .91 rH Top Mid 1.23 * .20 .000 .76 1.70 Low .97 * .17 .000 .55 1.38 Mid Top -1.23 * .20 .000 -1.70 -.76 Low -.26 .19 .332 -.71 .18 Low Top -.97 * .17 .000 -1.38 -.55 Mid .26 .19 .332 -.18 .71 rD Top Mid .97 * .22 .000 .44 1.50 Low .74 * .19 .001 .27 1.20 Mid Top -.97 * .22 .000 -1.50 -.44 Low -.23 .21 .506 -.73 .27 Low Top -.74 * .19 .001 -1.20 -.27 Mid .23 .21 .506 -.27 .73 rF Top Mid 1.15 * .25 .000 .54 1.76 Low .61 * .22 .021 .08 1.15 Mid Top -1.15 * .25 .000 -1.76 -.54 Low -.54 .24 .073 -1.11 .04 Low Top -.61 * .22 .021 -1.15 -.08 Mid .54 .24 .073 -.04 1.11 rP Top Mid 1.29 * .32 .001 .51 2.07 Low .94 * .28 .004 .26 1.62 Mid Top -1.29 * .32 .001 -2.07 -.51 Low -.350 .30 .498 -1.08 .39 Low Top -.94 * .28 .004 -1.62 -.26 Mid .35 .30 .498 -.39 1.08 * The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level. This was assumed as a sign of possible moderation by the organizational layer parameter, and tested by a follow-up multiple regression ( Table 19 ). Baron and Kenny (1986) recommended comparing the unstandardized B for two scenarios: with and without the influence of a potential moderator. The test showed that adding an organizational layer as a moderator lowers levels of B in all seven X n –Y relationships. Hence, the data quantitatively supported a moderating effect of the organizational layer. However, as shown below, the results from Phase 2 demonstrate that it is not the actual moderator, thought the moderation effect remains valid with another parameter. Table 19. Multiple regression analysis of moderation by organizational layer. Moderator presence B Std. Err. Beta t Sig. Lower 95 CI Upper 95 CI Without moderator (Const.) 2.30 .30 7.66 .000 1.70 2.90 rK .42 .08 .59 5.31 .000 .26 .58 With moderator (Const.) 3.35 .36 9.28 .000 2.63 4.08 rK .30 .07 .42 4.04 .000 .15 .45 org_layer -.29 .07 -.44 -4.23 .000 -.43 -.15 Without moderator (Const.) 2.03 .31 6.63 .000 1.42 2.65 rG .47 .08 .64 6.08 .000 .32 .63 With moderator (Const.) 3.07 .38 7.99 .000 2.30 3.84 rG .35 .08 .47 4.51 .000 .19 .50 org_layer -.26 .07 -.40 -3.85 .000 -.40 -.13 Without moderator (Const.) 2.16 .30 7.27 .000 1.56 2.75 rR .44 .07 .62 5.87 .000 .29 .59 With moderator (Const.) 3.19 .38 8.41 .000 2.43 3.95 rR .31 .07 .45 4.25 .000 .17 .46 org_layer -.26 .07 -.40 -3.81 .000 -.40 -.13 Without moderator (Const.) 2.17 .32 6.80 .000 1.53 2.81 rH .45 .08 .59 5.41 .000 .29 .62 With moderator (Const.) 3.31 .45 7.33 .000 2.41 4.22 rH .29 .09 .38 3.23 .002 .11 .48 org_layer -.26 .08 -.39 -3.32 .002 -.42 -.10 Without moderator (Const.) 2.46 .37 6.71 .000 1.72 3.20 rD .37 .09 .47 3.89 .000 .18 .56 With moderator (Const.) 3.74 .44 8.49 .000 2.86 4.63 rD .21 .09 .27 2.30 .026 .03 .39 org_layer -.32 .08 -.49 -4.23 .000 -.47 -.17 Without moderator (Const.) 3.08 .30 10.19 .000 2.48 3.69 rF .23 .09 .34 2.64 .011 .06 .41 With moderator (Const.) 4.20 .34 12.25 .000 3.52 4.89 rF .12 .08 .18 1.60 .115 -.03 .28 org_layer -.36 .07 -.55 -4.86 .000 -.51 -.21 Without moderator (Const.) 3.10 .24 12.76 .000 2.62 3.59 rP .22 .07 .40 3.25 .002 .09 .36 With moderator (Const.) 4.18 .32 13.17 .000 3.55 4.82 rP .12 .06 .21 1.84 .071 -.01 .24 org_layer -.34 .08 -.52 -4.51 .000 -.49 -.19 Three conditions for causal inference The positive correlation itself does not entail the causality of X n →Y. To be supported, the relationship should fulfill three conditions, namely (1) a significant association between variables, (2) a directional or temporal precedence of variance in X n to variance in Y, and (3) an unconfoundedness of this relationship ( Gelfand et al., 2009 ; Kenny, 1979 ). While the first condition is met, as reported above, the second is impossible to establish quantitatively in a cross-sectional design ( Gelfand et al., 2009 ; MacKinnon et al., 2007 ), so it has been examined qualitatively in Phase 2, as recommended by Maxwell (2004) . The third condition, unconfoundedness, appears to be the most questionable, as shown below. When planning the research, it was hypothesized (RH2) that each perceived congruence in MAC value causally impacts the perceived level of ethical leadership, and no possible interplay or interdependence of independent variables was assumed. The data show that all X n –X m pairwise correlations are significant and positive (.21 < r < .92, n = 56, p .05 ( Table 20 ). This may signal that some X M variables might confound or mediate relationships of other X n variables with Y. Table 20. Pairwise Pearson’s r. Variable pELS rK rG rR rH rD rF rK r .59 Sig. .000 rG r .64 .70 Sig. .000 .000 rR r .62 .75 .92 Sig. .000 .000 .000 rH r .59 .70 .77 .76 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 rD r .47 .73 .71 .76 .72 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 rF r .34 .38 .30 .34 .51 .43 Sig. .011 .004 .027 .010 .000 .001 rP r .40 .30 .21 .21 .43 .35 .76 Sig. .002 .023 .123 .126 .001 .009 .000 According to Kenny (1979) , the unconfoundedness of the X n –Y association implies that there is no controlling variable that turns their correlation insufficient or insignificant. Partial correlation test of X n –Y associations controlled by any other X C variable returned insignificant (p > .05) partial correlations for 18 X n –Y pairs out of 42 possible ( Table 21 ). The congruence in “kin”, “group”, “reciprocity” and “heroism” impacts some other constructs’ relationships with “perceived EL”, so that the unconfoundedness condition in this respect may not be fulfilled, hence questioning RH2. However, the quantitative data without theoretical explanation are not sufficient to infer a confounding influence ( Pieters, 2017 ). Therefore, the qualitative inquiry was expected to reveal these variables’ capacity to determine the importance of congruence in other values for the perception of a leader as ethical, which is reported below. Table 21. Pairwise Partial Correlation X n –Y controlled by X C. Control variable X C Test Variable X n rK rG rR rH rD rF rP rK Partial r .393 .347 .314 .072 .152 .294 Sig. .003 .009 .019 .604 .268 .029 rG Partial r .253 .121 .204 .028 .204 .361 Sig. .062 .379 .134 .840 .135 .007 rR Partial r .231 .205 .232 -.012 .169 .360 Sig. .090 .134 .088 .931 .216 .007 rH Partial r .294 .350 .330 .077 .048 .209 Sig. .029 .009 .014 .577 .728 .125 rD Partial r .404 .491 .468 .418 .171 .293 Sig. .002 .000 .000 .001 .213 .030 rF Partial r .524 .598 .575 .519 .378 .241 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .076 rP Partial r .531 .618 .604 .508 .381 .051 Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .004 .711 Table 22. Summary of the hypotheses test results. # Null hypothesis Result H1 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Care for kin” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H2 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in “Loyalty to the group” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H3 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Reciprocal exchange” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H4 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Display of dominance” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H5 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Display of deference” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H6 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Fairness” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported H7 0 Perceived follower–leader congruence in the “Respect to prior possession” MAC element has no positive effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership. Not supported Phase 2: Method and procedures The qualitative Phase 2 was intentionally limited in scope and focused only on themes which could confirm or reject the quantitative findings of the preceding survey. It aimed to triangulate the quantitative phase results by revealing qualitative evidence supporting or questioning RH2 to test whether two remaining conditions of causality are fulfilled, namely directionality and unconfoundedness. In addition, Phase 2 was aimed at verifying the Phase 1 assumption on the content validity of the Russian wording of the final instrument items. According to Maxwell (2004) , a comparative multicase design represents a qualitative strategy allowing for causality testing of relationships. He argues that such an approach addresses concerns related to qualitative case studies inability to infer what would have happened if a presumed cause was not present ( Cook, Campbell, & Shadish, 2002 ). Comparing cases here was expected to provide various perspectives on predetermined themes, so as to smooth the impact of one personal opinion on central tendency estimation. Hence, this phase represents the deductive case study, which is explanatory in Yin’ (2013) terminology, or instrumental in the Stake’s (1995) one, conducted in a multiple-case design for examination of causality following Maxwell’s (2004) recommendations, meaning by multiple cases the interviews made in a single organizational context. Semi-structured interviews were chosen as a methodology for Phase 2 to ensure the collection of comparable statements or judgments by setting particular themes for discussion. The propositions, a term suggested by Yin (2013) , are based on the MAC ( Curry, 2016 ) and ethical leadership ( Brown et al., 2005 ) theories, as well as the findings of Phase 1. The following questions were therefore posed for qualitative inquiry. First, have the relevant phenomena been properly measured by the items employed by Phase 1? The answer requires a qualitative examination of the relevance of the Russian wording of the mMAC-Q and the ELS sections’ items to the domain of perceived leaders’ morality, or the content validity of the questionnaire’s items. Second, are these constructs and the conceptual model relevant to the organizational context of the company? This implies examining whether the congruence in MAC values influences and precedes the perceived ethicality of the leader, how some MAC values interfere with others in their influence on the latter, and whether such an influence is unilateral and causal. Sampling and data collection procedure The literature suggests that the most common principle for defining the adequate sample size is saturation, which represents the point when the additional data reveals no new properties or insights about a construct examined ( Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006 ). Hennink and Kaiser (2022) show that, in recent empirical studies, the saturation was typically achieved within a range from 9 to 17 interviews, with a mean at 12–13 interviews, if the population was homogeneous, and objects were narrowly defined. Since Phase 2 involved sampling from a culturally homogeneous one-site population, and examined relationships between constructs that were narrowly defined by previous research, the sample size was arbitrarily set at 14 interviews. Applying the Hennink, Kaiser, and Marconi’s (2017) criteria, the code saturation was achieved after coding the first three interviews, while the meaning saturation was reached after the coding of the 10th interview, when no new meanings, nuances, or insights were found by analyzing the remaining transcripts. Therefore, 14 interviews were eventually considered the adequate sample size, which provided the necessary richness and depth of the qualitative data. Candidates for interviews were selected in collaboration with the company’s HR director based on the following criteria: they worked in the HQ of the company, they did not participate in the Phase 1 survey, and they demonstrated an interest in participation. The HR director had a series of phone conversations with potential participants until seven top-level and seven lower-level candidates had agreed to participate ( Table 23 ). Table 23. Interviewee profile. Participant Org layer Functional direction Gender Tenure in the company Knowing the leader Length of the interview Participant 1 Lower HR Male 3 years 9 months 95 Participant 2 Top Operations Male 3 months 3 months 71 Participant 3 Top Sourcing Male 1 year 1 year 88 Participant 4 Lower HR Female 1 year 0.5 years 76 Participant 5 Lower Operations Male 7 months 4 years 63 Participant 6 Lower Back Office Female 2 months 2 months 71 Participant 7 Top Quality Male 1 month 1 month 57 Participant 8 Top Accounting Female 4 years 2 years 60 Participant 9 Lower Operations Female 3 years 3 years 81 Participant 10 Lower Sourcing Female 4 years 2 years 64 Participant 11 Top Operations Male 2 years 2 years 69 Participant 12 Lower Back Office Female 1.5 years 0.5 years 91 Participant 13 Top Operations Male 3 years 2 years 90 Participant 14 Top Sales Male 6 years 2 years 77 For the avoidance of researcher bias, a professional Russian-speaking interviewer was invited to perform all interviews. Her purpose was to motivate interviewees to talk freely about themes taken from the modified instrument and provide justifications or rationalizations for their judgments and evaluations. In addition to this, she was expected to discuss with the participants what would happen to their perception of a leader if a similarity in moral values were to change. Practically, interviewees were asked to express their thoughts about the items used in the preceding survey. There were six female and eight male participants. All conversations were conducted and transcribed verbatim in Russian, which was the mother tongue of the majority of the interviewees. Those two persons who noted that their mother tongue was not Russian, spoke Russian with nativelike proficiency. The series of 14 interviews resulted in 1053 minutes of records, with each interview’s length lying in the range [57 min, 95 min], mean 75 minutes ( Table 23 ). Transcript files exceeded 120,000 words in total volume. Thematic analysis procedure The set of verified transcripts was analyzed applying Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase framework for thematic analysis using the Nvivo 1.7 package. The data and propositions were linked by the markers of assertion and explanation. When a phenomenon was named relevant or important, it was coded correspondingly. When the explanation of that importance indicated other markers of the importance, they were also linked to the respective proposition as potentially influencing the phenomenon they were used to explain. The main criterion of the relevance of evidence found in the data was frequency of display across numerous cases. When some aspect was found as coded episodically, it was eventually neglected; only assertion or explanation patterns that were widely repeated in numerous interviews were considered to reflect a tendency in the given population. After the initial coding, the codes were collated into themes, a term which here denotes data units for further interpretation of the aspects of phenomena under examination ( Boyatzis, 1998 ). The final iteration of review of transcripts, codes, and themes and elimination of the episodically mentioned codes and themes resulted in a final theme list . It needs to be noted that the coding was performed by the researcher, so the consideration of results of Phase 2 should keep in mind potential researcher bias, though the data analysis has been attempted in good faith, without conscious intention to confirm the findings of the previous phase. Ethical issues were addressed adhering to the Declaration of Helsinki principles, as outlined in detail in Ethics and Consent section below. Phase 2: Results Ethical leadership evaluation Each interview in Phase 2 included discussion about every item of the ELS in order to confirm the validity of Brown et al.’s (2005) interpretation of the ethical leadership concept for the company, which operates in a Russian cultural context within a specific industrial subculture. The way the content was coded resulted in numerous quotes referencing the ELS items’ relevance ( Table 24 ). All interviewees expressed no doubt when evaluating their CEO as an ethical leader, and that their judgments were unequivocal and unconditional. Despite the fact that four out of 10 items of ELS were considered as irrelevant by some interviewees, the dominant sentiment is that all aspects are important for such an evaluation. Hence, the present study confirms the content validity of the Russian-language ELS instrument when applied to the sample company. Table 24. Relevance of certain types of behavior for an ethical leader. ELS item Interviews References Dominant sentiment el1 Listens to what employees have to say 14 20 Positive el2 Disciplines employees who violate ethical standards 13 19 Positive el3 Conducts his/her personal life in an ethical manner 12 16 Mixed el4 Has the best interests of employees in mind 12 15 Mixed el5 Makes fair and balanced decisions 10 11 Positive el6 Can be trusted 11 18 Positive el7 Discusses business ethics or values with employees 11 16 Mixed el8 Sets an example of how to do things the right way in terms of ethics 10 12 Positive el9 Defines success not just by results but also the way that they are obtained 12 15 Positive el10 When making decisions, asks “what is the right thing to do?” 8 10 Mixed Leader’s proximity as an actual moderator There was no difference found between top- and lower-level interviewees in evaluation of their CEO as an ethical leader. All of them unequivocally assessed the leader as ethical, and all expressed sympathy and general follower-leader congruence in moral values. At the same time, the majority of participants noted a difference between top managers and other employees in evaluation of the leader. This is consistent with the moderating role of the organizational layer parameter revealed in Phase 1, though the data demonstrate its derivative nature. In responses to the reasoning request, interviewees explained the difference with reference to a proximity to the leader. At the same time, they repeatedly pointed out that proximity to the leader is not sufficient when communication is lacking. Communication frequency was noted by the interviewees as an even more important parameter influencing the evaluation of the leader as ethical. Direct communication was mentioned as an instrument for shaping followers’ perception, and thus one of the main constraints in big companies. Hence, communication deficit turns out to be the main reason for the difference between organizational levels in perceived level of ethical leadership. When communication is sufficient, the difference may disappear. None of the interviews pointed to a different reason. Therefore, although the perceived level of ethical leadership depends on the organizational level of evaluators in the focal population, the moderating role of the organizational layer parameter revealed in Phase 1 is found to be company specific, and not generalizable to a wider population. Instead, the leader’s proximity, that is behavioral visibility and cumulative communication duration with followers, emerge as factors influencing the perceived level of ethical leadership. Similarly, there is a difference in moral value congruence between different organizational levels and the leader. The proximity and communication were also noted as main reasons. On the other hand, inability to understand the leader was pointed out as a reason for the difference in value congruence. Hence, the farther the hierarchical distance between the leader and his actual or potential followers, the less their capacity for interaction, and, thus, the bigger the gap in congruence. Precedence of congruence in the MAC values for moral evaluation While the data set contains multiple indication of the perceived link between moral value congruence and the perception of ethical leadership, the exact mention of directionality is essential for the establishment or refutation of a causality hypothesis, namely the explicit indication that change in perceived value congruence precedes the change in the perceived level of ethical leadership or, vice versa—the mention of the influence of ethical leadership on moral value congruence. Although there is some mentioning of a congruence itself as a factor influencing ethical leadership, the main body of evidence is centered around the relevance of MAC moral behaviors for the assessment of a leader as ethical. The interviewees were responding to questions about the importance of these moral behaviors in such an evaluation, and, when justifying their opinions, they were predominantly talking about what is important for them personally, which was treated as possessing focal value or indicating appreciation of the corresponding behavior. Therefore, the relevance discussion was understood as a discussion about implied value congruence between participants and either an ideal leader of their dreams or the actual leader of the company. All MAC basic behaviors were recognized as important for the evaluation of a leader as ethical ( Table 25 ), though with differences in some nuances. Table 25. Frequency of relevance codes. Var Relevance of MAC values for an ethical leader Interviews References Dominant sentiment rK Care for kin 13 35 Relevant rG Loyalty to the group/Care for the group 14 76 Relevant rR Reciprocal exchange 14 75 Relevant rH Hawkish behavior/Heroism/Dominance 14 52 Relevant rD Dove-ish behavior/Deference/Submission 14 43 Relevant rF Fairness in distribution of disputed resources 14 60 Relevant rP Respect to prior possession 14 29 Relevant Care for kin (“kin”, X 1 ) was mainly pointed out as important for a leader mostly in the context of a group. Interviewees perceived such care as proof that their expectations regarding the leader’s care for a group would also be fulfilled. Although some point to a low significance of care for kin for leadership, such a view is rarely represented in the dataset. The importance of loyalty to the group and care for its members (“group”, X 2 ) is supported unanimously. All reasoning going beyond the intrinsic importance of a group itself is centered on performance indicators and factors leading to a better productivity. Uniting people within a group is seen as a prerequisite for productive work. This is consistent with group dynamics theorists positing that group cannot exist without cohesiveness ( Dion, 2000 ). Hence, care for a group turns out to be a core value, as it directly impacts the group’s well-being, while, on the contrary, lack of care entails lack of confidence. Such a confidence is a main rationale expressed by the interviewees when discussing the importance of a leader’s being reciprocal (“reciprocity”, X 3 ), which is perceived in terms of predictability. Reciprocal behavior is noted to be a facilitator of performance, and, thus, all participants are unanimous in feeling that the promises should be fulfilled. Hence, the consistency in reciprocity is stated as a basis of trust. Some perceive a leader with trust in advance, but a low level of reciprocity, when observed frequently, leads to the decrease in overall trust level. Hawkish (“heroism”, X 4 ) and dove-ish (“deference”, X 5 ) behaviors are mentioned by the MAC as a conflict-avoidance strategy and are both regarded as valuable in the leadership context. Being assertive and bold was regarded as a positive trait by all interviewees, as they recognize a leader’s responsibility to drive the company. It was noted that such behavior is inevitable if a leader aims to keep the big organization manageable. Participant 8 placed the importance of the ability to make hard decisions in the context of reciprocity, as making them entails making alike decisions by team members. Domination has also been mentioned as a productive behavioral feature in terms of day-to-day management. Deference was a regarded feature as well, however. Talking about a leader in a dove-ish role didn’t induce a wide emotional response and willingness to talk about it extensively. Meanwhile, some noted that leaders should respect superiors if expecting the same attitude from followers towards them. At the same time, such respect to superiors should be deserved by them, and may take a form of value congruence. The leader’s unfair behavior (“fairness”, X 6 ) in sharing resources was unanimously noted as morally bad. Favoritism, as a special case of unfair conduct, was sharply condemned by all interviewees. In contrast, the avoidance of favoritism induced a positive followers’ reaction. All unanimously supported the recognition of productive efforts, regardless of the leader’s personal sympathies. The recognition of somebody’s contribution to the result by a leader was perceived as fair and good, whereas unfair behavior was noted as negatively impacting trust. The leader’s respect to prior possession (“property”, X 7 ), was regarded as morally good by all interviewees. The majority couldn’t find a rational justification for this, and stressed emotionally that taking what does not belong to you is absolutely wrong. Some perceived respect to property as a matter of personal respect. Respect and trust Such a permanent noting of terms ‘respect’ and ‘trust’ requires attention, as these terms are not an explicit part of basic moral values as they suggested by MAC. The word ‘respect’ was mentioned numerously by every interviewee, or 186 times overall across the entire dataset. Besides the above-noted respect for a person as associated with respect to property (Participant 6), the term is related to respect to the position in hierarchy as recognition of the right to behave in a certain way (Participant 1), respect as admission of personal boundaries of another person (Participant 12), respect to the right of others for having personal opinion (Participant 14). Participant 4 placed respect in a context of reciprocal exchange in a straightforward way: … this is respect … ; we agreed, and that means we have a contract. You owe me then. And I owe you—to protect you, to defend your rights, etc. But this is a contract, you have to abide by it, you have to do certain things in time with a required quality (Participant 4). Regardless the context, respect emerges as a derivative of the recognition of the right of somebody else to act in a certain way or to possess something, which in turn comes from the reciprocal attitude that implies behaving with others the way that persons expect others to behave towards them. Therefore, respect has not been considered as an independent construct within the theoretical framework of the present research, as it can be reduced to Curry’s (2016) MAC basic reciprocal behavior. The word “trust” in various forms was used in the interviews over 300 times, which highlights its importance for the participants. All interviewees agree that ethical leaders can be trusted, and that trust is essential for a leader. Trust was prevalently noted by the interviewees as a product of compliance with ethics. That is, living one’s personal life in an ethical manner was pointed out as an element of a self-sacrifice, and some interviewees perceived it as an important cue of the leader’s readiness to take a similar attitude towards a group, as such consistency in behavior is treated as a prediction for the same behavior in the future. In all cases trust and confidence were mentioned in the context of behavioral predictability, which is perceived as important for all aspects of social life. Such a feature is consistent with recent literature, which considers the value of moral behavior in evolutionary terms as predictable, and thus saving the organism’s metabolic cost of adaptation in future cooperation ( Theriault, Young, & Barrett Feldman, 2021 ). Given the variety of possible moral behaviors that may be expected in future, trust appears rather as a composite phenomenon which can be explained as a combination of basic moral elements within Curry et al.’s (2021) combinatorial hypothesis. This was frequently noted in interviews, such as “something so systemic and big, but consisting of such small [things]” (Participant 5). Directionality and interdependence of moral values All interviewees point to the employees’ congruence in values with the company’s leader. Such a congruence is mentioned in various contexts or ways 45 times as a prerequisite for the evaluation of a leader as ethical ( Table 26 ). Meanwhile, the dominant participants’ sentiment is unwillingness to work together with a leader if there is no congruence in values, and expectation of decrease in the leader’s perceived ethicality if the congruence in values disappears. Table 26. Frequencies of directionality mentioning. Directionality code Interviews References Value congruence influences pELS (X → Y) 14 45 pELS has no influence on the interviewee’s values (X Y) 9 15 pELS may influence values of interviewee or other followers (Y → X) 10 13 Hence, the directionality of value congruence influence on perceived level of ethical leadership should be considered established. However, there is evidence of the opposite way of influence, though opinions on that way are controversial. Whereas nine participants asserted that their values cannot change as a response to an ethical leader’s behavior, 10 interviews showed that in certain circumstances such an influence is possible ( Table 26 ). Therefore, the congruence and perceived level of ethical leadership represent rather a positive feedback loop, than just a uni-dimensional influence of value congruence on evaluation of a leader, though the latter was mentioned substantially more frequently. Although the directionality hypothesis was supported, and the overall evaluation of a leader as ethical was noted as composite, “they are made up of little things” (Participant 2), the impact of different basic moral values varied. Some moral values turned out to be unimportant for the evaluation, in case the congruence in others is not felt or disappears, representing an asymmetry in perceived and assessed importance of values for the evaluation of a leader. When explaining why one or another MAC moral behavior is important for an ethical leader, most answers eventually reduced that importance to group interests or reciprocity ( Table 27 ). Other MAC values are either not mentioned in this context, or are mentioned episodically throughout the entire dataset, and thus neglected. Table 27. Value hierarchy in moral evaluation: Superiority of group and reciprocity. MAC Value Important in context of … Interviews References Superiority of care for group Care for kin Group interests/Care for group 7 13 Reciprocity Group interests/Care for group 5 6 Dominance/Heroism Group interests/Care for group 9 13 Deference Group interests/Care for group 4 5 Fairness Group interests/Care for group 11 17 Respect to property Group interests/Care for group 1 1 Superiority of reciprocal exchange Care for kin Reciprocity 1 2 Loyalty to the group Reciprocity 0 0 Dominance/Heroism Reciprocity 4 6 Deference Reciprocity 7 8 Fairness Reciprocity 2 2 Respect to property Reciprocity 2 2 The importance of congruence on a certain value in context of other values may represent a mediation relationship. If the value congruence X n influences “perceived EL” stronger when the mediating congruence X M is present, that may entail substantial implications for practitioners, as it represents an evident reason to concentrate on the mediator in daily practice. This does not refute RH2, which posits the causal influence of congruence in each MAC value on the perceived ethicality of a leader, though such an influence in some cases appears to be indirect. The results of mediation analysis are provided in the next section. Discussion Direct and indirect cause-effect relationship As reported above, the results from Phase 2 showed the interviewees’ unanimous unequivocal support for the influence of congruence in MAC basic moral values on the perception of a leader as ethical, though a positive feedback loop was also present in some extent. This means that the second condition of causal inference—directionality—is fulfilled. The third condition—unconfoundedness—is fulfilled fully for the influence of congruence in “group”, “reciprocity”, “fairness” and “property”, and partially for congruence in “kin”, “heroism”, and “deference”, on the perceived level of ethical leadership, as outlined below. Although both research phases demonstrate interdependence between congruence in some MAC values in their influence on the perceived level of ethical leadership, the results of the qualitative phase demonstrate no signs of conflation of the MAC values by the participants. Despite the statistically significant positive pairwise correlations between the MAC variables for some pairs, Phase 2 demonstrates their distinctness and relevance to the moral domain, which is consistent with recent research on the cross-cultural universality of the MAC values ( Alfano et al., 2022 ; Curry, Mullins, & Whiterhouse, 2019b ). Partial correlation analysis demonstrates that any of the MAC variables can interfere with the association between some other MAC variables and the evaluation of a leader as ethical. Therefore, given that the directionality condition has been considered established, mediation analysis was employed to identify whether there are MAC variables causally mediating the influence of other MAC variables. Statistical simple mediation analysis ( MacKinnon et al., 2007 ; Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007 ) of the data gathered in Phase 1 suggests that 16 out of 42 possible combinations of MAC values in X n →X M →Y relationships may be mediating, where X M stands for the MAC variable that mediated the influence of X n MAC variable on the perceived level of ethical leadership ( Table 28 ). The data collected by Phase 2 provides sufficient qualitative evidence supporting only six of these potential mediations. Hence, the triangulation of both studies led to the inference on the mediating role of the congruence in “group” and “reciprocity” MAC values in the influence of congruence in “care for kin”, “heroism” and “deference” on the perceived level of ethical leadership ( Table 29 ). In the meantime, the influence of congruence in “fairness” and “property” MAC values was considered as direct. Table 28. Pairwise indirect path assessment with bias-corrected CI and significance levels. Variables Indirect (ab’) ab’ CI 95% bootstrapped Total (c) Direct (c’, a, b’) Mediation IV (X n ) M (X M ) ab’ Sig. Lower bound Upper bound c Sig. c’ c’ Sig. a a Sig. b’ b’ Sig. rG rK .19 .031 .01 .42 .64 .003 .45 .007 .70 .006 .27 .047 Part rR rK .20 .041 .00 .55 .62 .005 .42 .056 .75 .008 .27 .054 Full rH rK .23 .010 .06 .70 .59 .004 .36 .077 .70 .004 .33 .018 Full rD rK .38 .003 .18 .70 .47 .004 .09 .718 .73 .004 .52 .005 Full rF rK .21 .005 .09 .42 .34 .077 .13 .347 .38 .022 .53 .002 rP rK .15 .034 .01 .37 .41 .005 .25 .040 .30 .079 .51 .003 Part rK rG .31 .004 .14 .53 .59 .003 .27 .047 .70 .006 .45 .007 Part rR rG .38 .231 -.29 .96 .62 .005 .24 .645 .92 .007 .42 .235 rH rG .34 .002 .15 .65 .59 .004 .25 .120 .77 .005 .45 .003 Full rD rG .44 .002 .26 .68 .47 .004 .03 .855 .71 .005 .62 .003 Full rF rG .17 .067 -.03 .40 .34 .077 .17 .095 .30 .099 .59 .002 rP rG .12 .115 -.04 .30 .41 .005 .28 .005 .21 .160 .58 .002 rK rR .32 .043 .02 .55 .59 .003 .27 .054 .75 .008 .42 .056 Full rG rR .22 .630 -.42 .99 .64 .003 .42 .235 .92 .007 .24 .645 rH rR .31 .028 .02 .71 .59 .004 .28 .129 .76 .008 .41 .033 Full rD rR .48 .003 .22 .72 .47 .004 -.01 .957 .76 .005 .64 .004 Full rF rR .20 .040 .02 .45 .34 .077 .14 .184 .34 .085 .58 .003 rP rR .12 .157 -.05 .33 .41 .005 .29 .007 .21 .198 .56 .003 rK rH .25 .041 .03 .51 .59 .003 .33 .018 .70 .004 .36 .077 Part rG rH .19 .111 -.05 .44 .64 .003 .45 .003 .77 .005 .25 .120 rR rH .21 .105 -.06 .50 .62 .005 .41 .033 .76 .008 .28 .129 rD rH .38 .001 .19 .67 .47 .004 .09 .511 .72 .003 .53 .003 Full rF rH .29 .001 .16 .54 .34 .077 .05 .703 .52 .005 .57 .002 rP rH .22 .001 .10 .43 .41 .005 .19 .118 .43 .006 .51 .003 Full rK rD .06 .703 -.19 .32 .59 .003 .52 .005 .73 .004 .09 .718 rG rD .02 .832 -.18 .22 .64 .003 .62 .003 .71 .005 .03 .855 rR rD -.01 .933 -.21 .27 .62 .005 .64 .004 .76 .005 -.01 .957 rH rD .06 .467 -.12 .36 .59 .004 .53 .003 .72 .003 .09 .511 rF rD .17 .001 .06 .40 .34 .077 .17 .261 .43 .003 .40 .002 rP rD .13 .007 .03 .31 .41 .005 .28 .038 .35 .023 .37 .002 Part rK rF .05 .298 -.03 .19 .59 .003 .53 .002 .38 .022 .13 .347 rG rF .05 .104 -.01 .17 .64 .003 .59 .002 .30 .099 .17 .095 rR rF .05 .132 -.01 .20 .62 .005 .58 .003 .34 .085 .14 .184 rH rF .02 .634 -.08 .21 .59 .004 .57 .002 .52 .005 .05 .703 rD rF .07 .199 -.03 .29 .47 .004 .40 .002 .43 .003 .17 .261 rP rF .06 .754 -.35 .34 .41 .005 .35 .052 .76 .007 .07 .777 rF rP .27 .048 .00 .60 .34 .077 .07 .777 .76 .007 .35 .052 rK rP .08 .076 .00 .23 .59 .003 .51 .003 .30 .079 .25 .040 rG rP .06 .155 -.02 .20 .64 .003 .58 .002 .21 .160 .28 .005 rR rP .06 .157 -.02 .19 .62 .005 .56 .003 .21 .198 .29 .007 rH rP .08 .092 -.01 .28 .59 .004 .51 .003 .43 .006 .19 .118 rD rP .10 .037 .00 .29 .47 .004 .37 .002 .35 .023 .28 .038 Part Table 29. Summary of simple mediation relationships. IV Mediating variable DV rK rG rR rH rD rF rP rK partial full partial pELS rG partial pELS rR full pELS rH full full full pELS rD full full full full partial pELS rF pELS rP partial full partial pELS Therefore, the three conditions for causal inference regarding the influence of congruence in MAC values and the perceived level of ethical leadership are fulfilled for “group”, “reciprocity”, “fairness” and “property” MAC values, and their influence is thus considered as direct and causal. The influence of the remaining three MAC values, namely “care for kin”, “heroism”, and “deference” is indirect and causally mediated by “group” and “reciprocity”. This inference resulted in the amended path model depicted by Figure 3 . Figure 3. Causal influence model. The figure depicts the resulting causal influence model, based on the research findings. Dashed lines denote mediated relationships. Each X n signifies perceived congruence in respective MAC basic moral value ( Curry, 2016 ). Y stands for perceived ethical leadership ( Brown et al., 2005 ). The moderating role of the leader’s behavior visibility to the followers and their cumulative communication duration is also depicted. Moral values hierarchy in ethical leadership For the population of both research phases, demonstration of fairness and respect to prior possession directly influences the perceived level of ethical leadership. The display of loyalty to the group and reciprocal behavior has the same effect, but they also play an additional role as mediators in influence of congruence in care for kin, heroism and deference on the followers’ moral evaluation of the leader. Being the way in which stimulus leads to response ( MacKinnon et al., 2007 ), mediation in this case implies reasoning behind the hierarchy of importance of the MAC values. That is, leader’s care for kin is important because it signals to followers that their leader will similarly take care of the group. Being assertive and sometimes dominant within the group is important because it leads to better group performance. Being forceful outwards is important when it protects group members and aims to enhance the group’s prosperity. The leader’s deference to superiors is important because it brings stability to the group’s future. Without referencing the group’s interests, all these three MAC values lose their importance for ethical leader evaluation. In a similar vein, reciprocity impacts the influence of congruence in care for kin, heroism and deference on the leaders’ perceived ethicality. Reciprocity is referred to as respect in the interviews, where it was frequently mentioned in a context implying the leader’s recognition of a deserved right to expect or receive or possess something. This perceived deserved right means the expectation of reciprocal behavior in exchange for actions undertaken in the past. The display of respect here applies not only to behavior towards followers, but also to all other stakeholders. It appears to be a value in itself, regardless of the personal interests of an interviewee. Hence, a dominant or assertive leader’s behavior is valuable only if respect is genuinely displayed, and respectful actions are undertaken. Deference is valued if it is the manifestation of respect to seniors or superiors. Care for kin is important as respect to a family, which serves as a predictive signal of respectful behavior towards followers. Hence, the degree of influence on the evaluation of a leader as ethical exerted by congruence in such MAC values as care for kin, heroism, and deference depends on the genuine subjection of such a behavior to the group’s interests, and the degree of reciprocity in wider terms that is displayed by the leader. Practically speaking, congruence with followers on these two mediating MAC values should be the first priority for a leader aiming to earn evaluation as ethical, along with fairness in distributing the disputed resources and respect to prior possession. In other words, to justify any decision without risking losing followers’ ethical evaluation, the leader must operate with care for the group, reciprocity in actions, and fairness in resource distribution, paying full respect to others’ property. While appeal to heroism, deference, and care for family are not expected to give a substantial effect on the perceived level of ethical leadership, this does not mean that they are not valued by followers or that they have no influence on evaluation at all. In a hypothetical situation when group members were to elect one of two leaders equally perceived as devoted to the group, and congruent with them in feeling the importance of reciprocity, fairness, and respect to prior possession, they will most likely elect that person who is perceived better in family values, heroism and deference. Unexpected findings The interdependence between MAC values appears to be even more complex than the mediation discussed above. As a matter of common sense, moral assessment should be a composite phenomenon, and the qualitative phase provides empirical support for such an intuitive guess. The data collected in Phase 2 provided clear evidence of the insufficiency of congruence in one standalone basic moral value for moral assessment. In the same vein, the data show limited ability of a follower–leader perceived incongruence in one standalone basic moral value to destroy the perception of the leader as ethical, given the inevitable influence of other values. The interviewees point to moral assessment as a complex phenomenon comprising numerous small factors. In the meantime, besides the value hierarchy and moral assessment complexity in ethical leadership, there are more findings unforeseen in the beginning of the research. The data for Phase 2 demonstrate possible counter-productivity of the moral management factor, which represents one of the pillars of Brown et al.’s (2005) concept of ethical leadership. The interviewees argue that excessive talk on ethics, or inconsistency of that talk with a leader’s behavior, results in lowered evaluation of the ethical leader. This finding is consistent with recent research ( Pircher Verdorfer & Peus, 2020 ). Nevertheless, this study supports the main proposition of ethical leadership theory, which posits that the exemplary role of a leader acts as the main factor in the leader’s influence on followers. While the causal positive influence of congruence in MAC values on the perceived level of ethical leadership was found established, some specifics of such influence were not evident before Phase 2 was conducted. The qualitative data demonstrate the special role of a leader, who apparently is perceived differently compared to other people in the group. The way the interviewees explained what is right and wrong in the behavior of a leader leaves the impression that in their view, there is the leader and “the others,” two parts of a team with equal weight, no matter how large the “others” part is. Recent literature suggests that assessing the morality of a leader differs from assessing others ( Crockett, Everett, Gill, & Siegel, 2021 ). For example, instrumental harm attributed to a leader can be viewed as morally good, as it entails benefit for the group, while it is morally unacceptable when caused by peers. Crockett and colleagues suggest that the deontological approach to the moral assessment of peers offers more certainty in terms of future inter-personal comfort in possible cooperation, whereas the peers’ tendency to apply instrumental harm entails future threat to an individual and may thus be condemned, even if it brings the utility for the group. In contrast, people apply the utilitarian approach more willingly when evaluating leaders ( Crockett et al., 2021 ). Due to the dependence of their actual or envisioned safety and well-being on leaders’ actions, people tend to afford instrumental harm to certain group members if it results in their group’s benefit, and thus to assess such behavior as morally good. Such an explanation gives the basis to understanding the value hierarchy revealed by this study. Limitations of research Although the sample size of the Phase 1 survey is satisfactory according to criteria suggested by the literature for regression analysis (see Fritz & MacKinnon, 2007 ), this might not be sufficient for good model fit in different circumstances. Keeping in mind Schreiber et al.’s (2006) arguments, it is recommended for future research to retest model fit on samples exceeding the product of 10 and the number of measured parameters. Moreover, to be generalizable across multiple groups, all the findings on association, moderation and mediation ideally need a retest in a multi-site research design with a substantially larger sample of at least M × N × 33 respondents, meaning M groups multiplied by N categories and 33 valid answers in each category. The content validity of the MAC items of the resulting modified instrument might represent an issue for future research and practical applications. These items were adopted from Curry, Chesters, and Van Lissa (2019a) , who, in turn, drew them from the peer-reviewed literature. However, Curry et al. argue that these items may measure different aspects of morality, even though they are within a designated group of typical solutions for cooperation problems. For better model fit, the original MAC-Q set of items have been reduced from an overall six per each MAC value, combining Judgment and Relevance scales, to just two items per construct, which can narrow substantially the possible aspects of morality covered by the resulting scales. Further research should examine their exhaustiveness and, thereby, the content validity of the entire instrument. Due to the focus on a company involved in the Russian logistics sector, the findings of both research phases are limited in generalizability to wider cultural and industrial contexts. Tested in different organizational circumstances, the hierarchy of congruence in MAC values might vary. Similarly, as the Russophones are spread across different countries that may culturally influence local diasporas ( Zabrodskaja & Ivanova, 2021 ), the hypotheses of this study would not necessarily be borne out by data from other countries’ Russophones. In the meantime, the qualitative data received affords the expectation of transferability to other groups, as the most participants’ explanations were made in contexts wider than the Company or industry or country. Nevertheless, the results of the present research may be limited in application to a possible wider cultural range of Russophone communities across the globe, and the hypotheses should be re-tested on samples collected in other countries’ diasporas to be applicable to Russophones worldwide. Although these limitations may prevent the theoretically sound generalization of the results to populations other than the focal one for the present research, this does not mean that these results will necessarily be false for other groups. While further research might examine wider generalization for the sake of scientific rigor, it appears already valuable to employ the findings of this thesis in applied research, management consultancy, and leadership practice. Theoretical and practical implications Theoretical contribution Banks et al. (2021) point to the lack of research on factors influencing the association between ethical leaders’ behaviors and their perception by followers. Similarly, Brown and Mitchell (2010) point to the lack of research on the influence of followers’ moral identity on the perception of a leader as ethical or unethical. This study contributes to closing this gap by providing empirical support for the influence of followers’ perceived moral value congruence with a leader on the perceived level of ethical leadership. In addition, it contributes to literature on the MAC and ethical leadership by empirical examination of the causal association between the concepts of both theories. Besides that, the discussion of MAC values in terms of perceived value congruence also turns out to be novel to this theory. Testing of MAC-Q items in a Russian-speaking environment and validating their modified composition widens their cross-linguistic and cross-cultural application to Russophone context. The same is true with the ELS instrument, which had not been applied to Russophones in literature available to the authors. Thus, this study contributes to the MAC and ethical leadership research domains by testing these theories and corresponding instruments in the Russophone context. The theoretical method employed in this thesis, namely quantitative inquiry with hierarchical regression analysis followed by semi-structured interviews, can be employed by leadership theorists, organizational consultants, or management practitioners for the assessment of the interdependence in the influence of MAC basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership within a given organizational context. Implications to leadership practice Due to established positive group outcomes of the high perceived ethical leadership ( Bedi et al., 2016 ), the enhancement of this perception has an evident practical rationale. Hence, the degree of importance of each MAC element represents valuable information for practitioners aiming to improve the perceived level of ethical leadership. Armed with such knowledge, leaders can adjust their behaviors accordingly, subsequently enhancing followers’ ethical evaluation, which results in enhancement of group’s outcomes. Moreover, given that congruence in “care for kin”, “heroism” and “deference” moral values is contingent on follower–leader congruence in such MAC elements as “group” and “reciprocity”, the leader’s behavior and narratives reflecting these values should be placed into the context of the safety of and utility for the group, and of respect for others’ efforts and achievements, if the leader aims to attain a better result. If applying the suggested method in different organizational contexts will reveal other value hierarchies, leaders can adjust their behavior accordingly in order to achieve better perceived value congruence. On the other hand, the above-noted positive feedback loop of the influence of ethical leadership on moral value congruence suggests that followers’ moral values could change in certain conditions. From the practical standpoint, moral value management in a group may appear suitable for pursuing ethical leaders’ purposes. Knowledge of congruence in particular MAC elements may serve as a guide for leaders’ choices regarding moral manifestations to change their followers’ MAC values preferences, which can eventually enhance organizational outcomes in accordance with the ethical leadership theory. Further research Future research is necessary to expand the theoretical and practical implications of this study. Besides testing its findings beyond the limitations outlined above, some avenues for academic inquiry represent interest in the advancement of knowledge on moral psychology and ethical leadership. This section suggests such avenues from the authors’ perspective, though these suggestions under no circumstances should be considered an exhaustive set of potentially interesting research areas, as the field’s potential scope appears to be substantially wider. The core of leadership phenomena is a leader’s influence on followers ( Northouse, 2019 ). Brown et al. (2005) build the ethical leadership theory on social learning theory, which involves the role model concept. Gibson’s (2004) concept of a behavior induced by role models may be decomposed to four components, namely attributes of people in social roles, perception of personal attributes as similar, the desire to increase such similarity, and the emulation of that similar behavior. While the perception of similarity was approached by this study to some extent, the phenomenon of social role attribution of MAC elements has not been touched. The knowledge of mechanics underlying the association between MAC values attribution, perceived congruence, and the desire to act similarly turns out to be essential for the understanding of ethical leaders’ influence, so it needs to be addressed in future studies. Research on the dynamics of the influence of the particular composition of MAC values demonstrated by a leader could make a substantial theoretical contribution given the interdependence of values in moral assessment demonstrated by this research. Such an interplay of MAC values may represent multiple mediation relationships, or depend on the degree of the follower–leader communication frequency, or demonstrate some other specifics that cannot be foreseen based on the findings of this research. More research is thus required for a deeper understanding of the relationship between MAC basic moral values and ethical leadership. The dynamics of leader’s influence may also depend on the stability of moral evaluation. Recent research shows that moral judgments vary within a week in sacrificial dilemmas ( Rehren & Sinnott-Armstrong, 2022 ). Further research should find an answer to the question of the stability of followers’ MAC value composition. From the practical standpoint, this would provide leaders with knowledge of the moments when the moral accents in their behavior should be re-adjusted to followers’ moral expectations. Newly formed teams may differ in moral consensus achievement dynamics compared to established groups. Knowledge of the dynamics of belief equilibrium formation can be beneficial for the practice of ethical leadership in early-stage start-up management or in mature corporations’ efforts to expand to new markets. Gavrilets (2021) suggests an approach to modeling group behavior as a function of norms, personal beliefs, and material payoffs. The application of this or a similar approach to group dynamics might entail valuable theoretical and practical implications in the ethical leadership domain. Similarly to newly-established groups with possibly varying moral prioritization across members, mixed-culture teams may face the same specifics and thus represent a promising area for future research. The differences in moral assessment imposed by either cultural or any other conditions may be reduced to variance in MAC values prioritization, according to the combinatorial hypothesis proposed by Curry et al. (2021) . Due to its potentially substantial theoretical and practical implications, it deserves extensive cross-cultural qualitative tests. The qualitative data of Phase 2 provides supporting evidence for such moral values as trust and respect. As the hypothesis claims that any moral value may be reduced to the combination of MAC basic moral elements, qualitative inquiry into wide spectrum of moral values is required. Besides the prospective research areas mentioned above, there may be others—for example, the influence of the MAC values on narratives that reflect moral evaluation ( Kim & Crockett, 2022 ), the way normative evaluation shapes the behavioral patterns ( Theriault et al., 2021 ) in the context of the MAC and ethical leadership, and so forth. Answers to such questions have practical importance for a group’s behavior engineering, meaning by this the leaders’ fine-tuning of their own narratives and behaviors to achieve the desired followers’ behavior. Such social engineering appears to be a wide and interesting topic for ethical leadership practice. Conclusion Keeping in mind the limitations discussed earlier, the data gathered in both phases of this study supports the following statements at least for the population studied. First, there is a positive association between perceived congruence in MAC basic moral values and the perceived level of ethical leadership, and, in this association, perceived value congruence causally influences the perceived ethicality of a leader, though there is a positive feedback loop to a certain extent. Second, this influence is moderated by the proximity of the leader, understood as the extent to which followers can observe the leader’s behavior, combined with the frequency and duration of the leader’s communication with the followers. Third, the leader’s values observed by the followers are not equal in their influence on the perceived level of ethical leadership; so that influence of congruence in “care for kin”, “hawkish” and “dove-ish” basic moral behaviors on perceived ethical leadership is mediated by congruence in two other basic moral behaviors, namely “loyalty to the group” and “reciprocal exchange”, while congruence in “fairness” and “respect to prior possession” positively influences perceived ethical leadership without mediators. Besides this, the results of practical application of the morality-as-cooperation and ethical leadership theories in a Russophone organization supports their validity in Russophone contexts. Over and above this theoretical contribution, instruments and method have been offered to ethical leadership practitioners for the assessment of perceived congruence in MAC values, perceived level of ethical leadership, and their interdependence in the Russian language context. Ethics & consent This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of SBS Swiss Business School and adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval for conducting both phases of the research was obtained from the SBS Swiss Business School Ethical Committee. The informed consent was received from each participant in both study phases by checking the corresponding box in the Web-form in the Phase 1, and in written and oral forms in the Phase 2. Author contributions Alexey Belinskiy: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, visualization, writing — original draft preparation. Carl Olsen: Supervision, methodology, validation, writing — review and editing. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SZ93M Data availability Underlying data Open science framework: Influence of MAC Moral Value Congruence on Perceived Level of Ethical Leadership. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/42TNC This project contains following data: 1. Anonymized quantitative results are provided in a.dbf file containing raw Likert values . Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Restricted data: Interview transcripts are available upon request. While anonymized, these transcripts may contain sensitive information about the sample company. As per agreement between the authors and the sample company, qualitative data can only be shared with third parties who demonstrably have no intention or ability to harm the sample company’s business. This determination is at the Corresponding author’s discretion and requires the requesting party to sign a Confidentiality Agreement. The agreement form (Confidentiality agreement for the qualitative data disclosure.pdf ) can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/42TNC . Extended data Open science framework: Influence of MAC Moral Value Congruence on Perceived Level of Ethical Leadership [Dataset]. OSF. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/42TNC This project contains following data: The original, the original interview script and its English translation, and the interview written consent form. Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Reporting guidelines The reporting style adheres to the APA JARS guidelines, namely JARS-Quant ( Appelbaum et al., 2018 ) for the quantitative Phase 1, and JARS-Qual ( Levitt et al., 2018 ) for the qualitative Phase 2. Referencing style: The Ac ademy of Management Journal http://aom.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/AMJ/AMJ Style Guide(1).pdf style guide (with only italic book and journal titles). References Alfano M: Varieties of moral motivation: Empirical perspectives.Copp D, Rosati C, editors. Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press; 2022. Alfano M, Cheong M, Curry O: Moral universals: A machine-reading analysis of 256 societies.2022. Publisher Full Text Appelbaum M, Cooper H, Kline RB, et al. : Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. Am. Psychol. 2018; 73 (1): 3–25. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Aybek EC, Toraman C: How many response categories are sufficient for Likert type scales? An empirical study based on the Item Response Theory. Int. J. Assess. Tool. Educ. 2022; 9 : 534–547. Publisher Full Text Babakus E, Mangold WG: Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: An empirical investigation. Health Serv. Res. 1992; 26 (6): 767–786. PubMed Abstract Banks GC, Fischer T, Gooty J, et al. : Ethical leadership: Mapping the terrain for concept cleanup and a future research agenda. Leadersh. Q. 2021; 32 (2): 101471. Publisher Full Text Baron RM, Kenny DA: The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1986; 51 (6): 1173–1182. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Bedi A, Alpaslan CM, Green S: A meta-analytic review of ethical leadership outcomes and moderators. J. Bus. Ethics. 2016; 139 (3): 517–536. Publisher Full Text Belinskiy A, Olsen C: Influence of MAC Moral Value Congruence on Perceived Level of Ethical Leadership. [Dataset]. OSF. 2024. Publisher Full Text Publisher Full Text Boyatzis RE: Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code Development. SAGE; 1998. Braun V, Clarke V: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006; 3 (2): 77–101. Brown ME, Mitchell MS: Ethical and unethical leadership: Exploring new avenues for future research. Bus. Ethics Q. 2010; 20 (4): 583–616. Publisher Full Text Brown ME, Treviño LK: Do role models matter? An investigation of role modeling as an antecedent of perceived ethical leadership. J. Bus. Ethics. 2014; 122 (4): 587–598. Publisher Full Text Brown ME, Treviño LK, Harrison DA: Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 2005; 97 (2): 117–134. Publisher Full Text Buchanan A: Our moral fate: evolution and the escape from tribalism. MIT Press; 2020. Cook TD, Campbell DT, Shadish W: Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin Boston; 2002. Crockett MJ, Everett JAC, Gill M, et al. : Chapter One—The relational logic of moral inference.Gawronski B, editor. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 64 . . Academic Press; 2021; pp. 1–64. Publisher Full Text Curry OS: Morality as cooperation: a problem-centred approach.Shackelford TK, Hansen RD, editors. The Evolution of Morality. Springer International Publishing; 2016; pp. 27–51. Publisher Full Text Curry OS, Alfano M, Brandt MJ, et al. : Moral molecules: Morality as a combinatorial system. Rev. Philos. Psychol. 2021; 13 : 1039–1058. Publisher Full Text Curry OS, Chesters MJ, Van Lissa CJ: Mapping morality with a compass: Testing the theory of ‘morality-as-cooperation’ with a new questionnaire. J. Res. Pers. 2019a; 78 : 106–124. Publisher Full Text Curry OS, Mullins DA, Whiterhouse H: Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies. Curr. Antropol. 2019b; 60 (1): 47–69. Publisher Full Text DeScioli P: The side-taking hypothesis for moral judgment. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2016; 7 : 23–27. Publisher Full Text Dion KL: Group cohesion: From “field of forces” to multidimensional construct. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract. 2000; 4 (1): 7–26. Publisher Full Text Edwards JR, Cable DM: The value of value congruence. J. Appl. Psychol. 2009; 94 (3): 654–677. Publisher Full Text Egorov M, Kalshoven K, Pircher Verdorfer A, et al. : It’s a match: Moralization and the effects of moral foundations congruence on ethical and unethical leadership perception. J. Bus. Ethics. 2020; 167 (4): 707–723. Publisher Full Text Fornell C, Larcker DF: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981; 18 (1): 39–50. Publisher Full Text Fritz MS, MacKinnon DP: Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychol. Sci. 2007; 18 (3): 233–239. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Gavrilets S: Coevolution of actions, personal norms and beliefs about others in social dilemmas. Evol. Hum. Sci. 2021; 3 : e44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Gelfand LA, Mensinger JL, Tenhave T: Mediation analysis: A retrospective snapshot of practice and more recent directions. J. Gen. Psychol. 2009; 136 (2): 153–178. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Gibson DE: Role models in career development: New directions for theory and research. J. Vocat. Behav. 2004; 65 (1): 134–156. Publisher Full Text Gravetter FJ, Wallnau LB, Forzano L-AB, et al. : Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences. Cengage Learning; 2020. Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L: How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006; 18 (1): 59–82. Haidt J: The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon/Random House; 2012; xvii, 421. Haidt J, Joseph C: Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus. 2004; 133 (4): 55–66. Publisher Full Text Hair JF, Ortinau DJ, Harrison DE: Essentials of marketing research. Vol. 2 . .Irwin New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2010. Hayes SC, Pankey J, Gregg J: Acceptance and commitment therapy. Anxiety Disorders: A Practitioner’s Guide to Comparative Treatments. 2002; pp. 110–136. Hennink MM, Kaiser BN, Marconi VC: Code saturation versus meaning saturation: How many interviews are enough? Qual. Health Res. 2017; 27 (4): 591–608. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Hennink M, Kaiser BN: Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Soc. Sci. Med. 2022; 292 : 114523. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M: A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J.Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015; 43 (1): 115–135. Hoch JE, Bommer WH, Dulebohn JH, et al. : Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis. J. Manag. 2018; 44 (2): 501–529. Publisher Full Text Kalshoven K, Den Hartog DN, De Hoogh AH: Ethical leadership at work questionnaire (ELW): Development and validation of a multidimensional measure. Leadersh. Q. 2011; 22 (1): 51–69. Publisher Full Text Kenny DA: Correlation and Causality (Revised edition). Wiley; 1979. Kim J, Crockett MJ: Narrating the “what” and “why” of our moral actions. Proc. Annu Meet. Cogn. Sci. Soc. 2022; 44 (44). Reference Source Langlois L, Lapointe C, Valois P, et al. : Development and validity of the ethical leadership questionnaire. J. Educ. Adm. 2014; 52 : 310–331. Publisher Full Text Levitt HM, Bamberg M, Creswell JW, et al. : Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report. Am. Psychol. 2018; 73 (1): 26–46. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text MacKinnon D, Fairchild A, Fritz M: Mediation analysis. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2007; 58 : 593–614. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Maxwell JA: Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field Methods. 2004; 16 (3): 243–264. Publisher Full Text Northouse PG: Leadership: Theory and practice. 8th ed.Sage Publications Inc.; 2019. Peng JC, Lin J: Mediators of ethical leadership and group performance outcomes. J. Manag. Psychol. 2017; 32 (7): 484–496. Publisher Full Text Pieters R: Meaningful mediation analysis: plausible causal inference and informative communication. J. Consum. Res. 2017; 44 (3): 692–716. Publisher Full Text Pircher Verdorfer A, Peus C: Leading by example: Testing a moderated mediation model of ethical leadership, value congruence, and followers’ openness to ethical influence. Business Ethics: A European Review. 2020; 29 (2): 314–332. Publisher Full Text Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, Hayes AF: Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivar. Behav. Res. 2007; 42 (1): 185–227. Rai TS, Fiske AP: Moral psychology is relationship regulation: Moral motives for unity, hierarchy, equality, and proportionality. Psychol. Rev. 2011; 118 (1): 57–75. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Ratner B: The correlation coefficient: Its values range between +1/−1, or do they? J. Target. Meas. Anal. Mark. 2009; 17 (2): 139–142. Publisher Full Text Rehren P, Sinnott-Armstrong W: How stable are moral judgments?2022. Publisher Full Text Riggio RE, Zhu W, Reina C, et al. : Virtue-based measurement of ethical leadership: The Leadership Virtues Questionnaire. Consult. Psychol. J.: Pract. Res. 2010; 62 (4): 235–250. Publisher Full Text Ryazantsev SV: The modern Russian-speaking communities in the world: Formation, assimilation and adaptation in host societies. Mediterr. J. Soc. Sci. 2015; 6 (3 S4): 155. Schein C, Gray K: The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2018; 22 (1): 32–70. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, et al. : Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J. Educ. Res. 2006; 99 (6): 323–338. Publisher Full Text Spangenberg H, Theron CC: Promoting ethical follower behaviour through leadership of ethics: The development of the ethical leadership inventory (ELI). S. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2005; 36 (2): 1–18. Publisher Full Text Stake RE: The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications Inc.; 1995. Taber KS: The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018; 48 (6): 1273–1296. Publisher Full Text Taherdoost H: What is the best response scale for survey and questionnaire design: Review of different lengths of Rating scale /Attitude scale/Likert scale. Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 2019; 8 (1): 1–10. Theriault JE, Young L, Barrett Feldman L: The sense of should: A biologically-based framework for modeling social pressure. Phys. Life Rev. 2021; 36 : 100–136. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Tomasello M: A natural history of human morality. Harvard University Press; 2016. Ullman JB: Structural equation modeling: Reviewing the basics and moving forward. J. Pers. Assess. 2006; 87 (1): 35–50. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Wang G, Hackett RD: Virtues-centered moral identity: An identity-based explanation of the functioning of virtuous leadership. Leadersh. Q. 2020; 31 (5): 101421. Publisher Full Text Westra E, Andrews K: A new framework for the psychology of norms. PsyArXiv. 2022. Publisher Full Text Wong DB: Moral relativity. University of California Press; 1984. Yin RK: Designing case studies.Maruster L, Gijsenberg MJ, editors. Qualitative Research Methods. SAGE; 2013. Yukl G, Mahsud R, Hassan S, et al. : An improved measure of ethical leadership. J. Leadersh. Org. Stud. 2013; 20 (1): 38–48. Publisher Full Text Zabrodskaja A, Ivanova O: The Russian language maintenance and language contacts of post-soviet immigrants in europe and beyond. Russ. J. Linguist. 2021; 25 : 828–854. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 03 Dec 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 SBS Swiss Business School, Kloten, Zurich, 8302, Switzerland Alexey Belinskiy Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Carl Olsen Roles: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (1) version 1 Published: 03 Dec 2024, 13:1472 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 Copyright © 2024 Belinskiy A and Olsen C. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Belinskiy A and Olsen C. Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.153281.1 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 03 Dec 2024 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Li-Ping Tang T. Reviewer Report For: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.168158.r350483 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1#referee-response-350483 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 23 Jan 2025 Thomas Li-Ping Tang , Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, USA Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.168158.r350483 Title: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case I offer my review comments below. The authors of this paper provide an interesting review ... Continue reading READ ALL Title: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case I offer my review comments below. The authors of this paper provide an interesting review of the literature, present several hypotheses, collect data from 56 participants of a Russian logistics company in Moscow’s HQ, and present some interesting expected and unexpected results. The authors have engaged a great deal of work into the design, conduct, analysis, and write-up of this paper. I have enjoyed reading this paper. My goal of this review is to help authors improve their presentation of ideas and enhance value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the journal, F1000Research , specifically, and the field of management and business ethics, in general. I offer the following comments with the hope of helping authors maximize their value-added contributions and future citations. 1. First, authors must demonstrate the extent to which their article makes specific, significant, and value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the literature: theoretical (41%), empirical (42%), and practical (17%) (Rynes, 2005). Interestingly, theoretical and empirical contributions are equally important. Bartunek J, et al., 2005 (Ref 1) 2. For the Title of your article, we must create a good first impression to attract readers’ attention and their future citations. Please incorporate the following ideas into your Title. Following Search Engine Optimization (SEO) , Springer’s instructions for authors recommend that your title’s first 55 characters with space be brief and contain words that are useful for indexing. Authors must write succinctly, focus on what is important, and delete unnecessary words. Think: “ W hat’s I mportant N ow ( WIN )? Holtz, L. (2006). Wins, losses, and lessons: An autobiography . HarperCollins. According to Leonardo da Vinci: Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. 3. Does your main Title capture the most significant aspect of your study? Please ask an interesting question as the main title and provide the answers in the subtitle. Please demonstrate: Why is this important? Why do we want to know? 4. To simplify, please consider the following suggestion: Perceived moral values congruence impacts ethical leadership: Evidence from Russia 5. Abstract, Methods. I would expect to see more details regarding your study, e.g., the contextualization (location of your data collection), the population, your sample, and sample size. I assume that you are very proud of this study because you have collected your data in Russia, a very unique and special sample. Thus, you must highlight these bright spots in your Title, Abstract, and Keywords. See my point #2. 6. Readers and the AI’s search engine optimization (SEO) will identify your published article more quickly and present it at the very top of the search results, if you repeat these critical constructs in your Title, Abstract, and Keywords. 7. Results: Please change/edit your statement to: ( r (54) = [.34; .64], p < .05). Please make corrections throughout the article. The letters “ r ” and “ p ” have special meaning in statistics. 8. In the following article, the authors identify 28,774 articles and explore the writing styles and citation count. Boghrati R, et al., 2023 (Ref 2) To increase your communications’ impact, please use first person, present tense, active voice , and emotional language to increase readers’ arousal, feelings, and memory, and enhance future citations. Please re-write your whole article following the instructions below: Functional words explain 4% of the overall variance explained and 11% of language’s impact on citations. Use Present tense: It helps make the content current, in the moment (literature review), revealing its importance and impact. Use First-person pronouns, like “I” or “we”: It helps authors take personal ownership of arguments, hypotheses, findings, and contributions, impress readers as knowledgeable, important, and impactful, and have authority, power, and success. Use Indefinite articles (i.e., “a” or “an”): It makes content much broader and generally applicable than definite articles (i.e., “the”). Use First-person (“I” or “we”), fewer articles, or prepositions. Simpler front ends will lead to high citations. Use Active Voice : For example, we conducted this research. We collected the data. Avoid Passive Voice : For example, research was conducted. Data were collected. Use Emotional Language: Don’t just cite numbers and statistics. Do provide real examples and demonstrate the consequences of critical events. Corruption caused the destruction of Enron and Arthur Andersen, the incarceration of executives, and the disruption of 110,000 employees' careers worldwide. (Tang et al., 2023, p. 927). 9. Incorporate contextualization into theoretical and practical implications. Can you find these patterns only in Russia or other cultures (nations)? Why? Why not? Johns G, 2017 (Ref 3) Rousseau D, et al., 2001 (Ref 4) Tsui A, 2009 (Ref 5) Whetten D, 2009 (Ref 6) 10. Introduction. I expect to read the three-page Introduction with the following expectations. An exemplary Introduction serves three significant purposes and attempts explicitly to (1) show the significance of the topic, “hook” readers’ interest, attract their attention, and motivate them to read further, (2) identify the theoretical gaps, inconsistencies, controversies, and deficiencies of this topic in the literature, and (3) provide a brief preview of your specific value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the literature that will fill the gaps and resolve these issues. The award-winning authors had written the same Introduction, on average, ten (10) times , before they published their articles. Grant A, et al., 2011 (Ref 7) Hemingway took writing very seriously. Hence his quote: “ Don’t get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to writing…I rewrote the first part of A Farwell to Arms at least fifty (50) times ”. 11. In your Introduction, you state: “Curry (2016) proposed the morality-as-cooperation (MAC) theory ”. I use this term, search the Scopus database, and find 30 articles: 10 in 2024, 5 in 2023, 4 in 2022, 7 in 2021, 3 in 2020, and 2 in 2019. I take a quick look. You have not cited any of these 10 articles published in 2024 on your Reference list. It appears that your literature review is dated . Please keep it current and up to date. 12. Develop a robust theory in the Introduction. Show your theoretical model, list all the constructs, and explain the relationships among these components. You mention nothing regarding Relevance and Judgment in your theory until the Measurement section and Table 2. Don’t “surprise” your readers. 13. Please read Curry, Mullins, and Whitehouse’s (2019) interesting cross-cultural study, digest the contents carefully, identify the gaps, and quote key ideas to set it up for your current research. 14. To help you revise this paper and identify the gap of the literature, I offer my suggestions below: In Curry et al.’s (2019) article, we discover several important clues that demonstrate the robust theoretical and empirical gaps in the literature. We list them briefly below. In their reply to several eminent authors’ comments at the end of their article, the authors mention that “Bloom questions whether MAC is a ‘psychological theory’” (Curry et al., 2019, p. 63). “Hence moral value will exhibit a multifactorial structure, varying on these seven dimensions” (p. 63). “Further research will be needed to test the subsequent prediction that individual (and cultural) differences in moral values will reflect the value of cooperation at different stages of development (Curry 2005:182; Sheskin et al. 2014), and under different social conditions” (Curry et al., 2019: 63-64). “Moreover, the authors observe that they ‘were not able to measure within- or between-society variations” (p. 63). Following Curry et al.’s (2019) excellent points above, the present study answers their calls, expands “the theory of Morality-as-Cooperation” (MAC) developed, qualitatively, in the field of anthropology to a new context, and treats Morality-as-Cooperation as a “psychological theory” (p. 63). We apply MAC’s multifactorial structure and explore this construct’s impact on individuals’ ethical behaviors, a brand-new perspective in a new academic field to establish it validity. Empirically, we collect data from Russia, a highly under-researched region of the world. To the best of our knowledge, no researchers have investigated the MAC construct among citizens in Russia. We apply recent advanced and powerful measurement theory (formative vs. reflective models), structural equation modeling (SEM) technique (IBM SPSS Amos), and investigate individuals’ potential within- and between-subjects differences. A formative SEM model allows us to treat MAC’s seven dimensions as independent and yoked antecedents of the unmeasured latent construct, MAC, which leads to the outcome variables. We test the theoretical SEM model across genders, age groups, and organizational levels using Mult-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCF). These methods allow researchers to identify the relative contributions of MAC’s seven subconstructs to the latent construct, MAC, and the consequences, and examine within- and between-subjects differences across various contexts. Scholars can simultaneously inspect the correlations among these seven subconstructs. Specifically, MAC’s seven independent dimensions may make positive or negative, and significant or non-significant, contributions to the latent construct and the outcomes. Our study’s novel findings offer robust theoretical, empirical, and practical implications to the management and business ethics literature. [Here I am showing you that ideally this is what you can do. You must have a large sample size ( N = 456) and additional outcome variables to accomplish these objectives. If you have data from more than 30 countries, then follow the 30*30 rule to conduct cross-level analysis. See more discussion on these issues below] 15. According to Curt Lewin: “There is nothing more practical than a good theory”. Please also see Tang (2024b) below: Tang, T. L. P. (2024b). Monetary Wisdom: Crafting an inspirational, memorable, and practical theory. In Tang, T. L. P. (Ed.) (2024). Monetary wisdom: Monetary aspirations impact decision-making. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, An Imprint of Elsevier. Paperback ISBN: 9780443154539; eBook ISBN: 9780443154546 A theory is an explanation. It takes a blizzard of facts and observations and explains your key ideas in the most basic terms . A theory is incomplete and oversimplified. However, it helps readers understand. An excellent paper has a strong theory. 16. A good paper with a strong theory should have well-constructed logical arguments, rich and novel insight, adequate conceptual development, and a deep appreciation for the relevant literature. Please read the following articles for more information. Alvesson M, et al., 2011 (Ref 8) Tang, T. L. P. (2021). Creating inspirational, memorable, and practical theories: The lessons of The Last Supper . In G. R. Ferris, P. L. Perrewé, & A. Akande (Eds.). Emerging trends in global organizational science phenomena: Critical roles of politics, leadership, stress, and context (Chapter 9, 183-195). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Here are some guidelines for reviewing papers submitted to top journals (or the Academy of Management annual conference). Please ask yourself and examine your composition from the Reviewer’s perspective:  Introduction Is there a clear research question with a solid motivation behind it? Is the research question interesting? After reading the introduction, did you find yourself motivated to read further?  Theory Does the submission contain a well-developed and articulated theoretical framework? Are the core concepts of the submission clearly defined? Is the logic behind the hypotheses persuasive? Is extant literature appropriately reflected in the submission, or are critical references missing? Do the hypotheses or propositions logically flow from the theory? 17. Besides, please follow Steve Jobs’ mantra: “Focus and Simplify.” See also Adam Grant’s 2016 book on Originals . The 1986 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences, Prof. James M. Buchanan, stated: “Economics requires expository writing skills, logical structures of analysis, and a grounding in ultimate reality.” On November 21, 1991, James M. Buchanan revealed the secret to his success: “Hard work, a sense of self-confidence, a willingness to challenge all authority, scientific or otherwise”. Albert Szent-Gyorgi (born in Budapest, Hungary, the 1937 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine, discovered Vitamin C and its components) stated: “Discovery consists of seeing what everyone has seen, and thinking what no one has thought”. Did you cite an interesting story to attract readers’ attention? Is your research relevant to real people in ultimate reality ? This is sadly missing. 18. Specifically, your Introduction leads readers to a theoretical model. Please explain the components of your model and the relationships among these components. Please spell out all these constructs clearly and explicitly. Provide an overarching theoretical model. Define all key constructs at the beginning of your Theory and Hypothesis. 19. Provide detailed theoretical arguments (research findings) regarding how and why the relationship between X and Y is moderated and mediated by other variables (M and Z). Explain all the theoretical arguments regarding arrows in your model, not just the boxes . Thomas D, et al., 2011 (Ref 9) 20 As Sutton and Staw stated: “But it still contained no discussion of what these theories were about and no discussion of the logical arguments why these theories led to the author’s predictions ” (1995: 373). “ Data describe which empirical patterns were observed and theory explains why empirical patterns were observed or are expected to be observed” (p. 374). Sutton R, et al., 1995 (Ref 10) 21. A complete theory must have the following elements: What, How, Why, Who, Where, and When . An interesting paper has the following two critical ingredients: (1) “aha” (what is new here?) and (2) “so-what” (what can researchers and practitioners do with these new findings?). These components were missing. 22. What makes a theory interesting, notable, influential, and famous? When researchers see a good theory, they find that the theory is not only true but also more importantly, it is challenging the assumptions underlying existing theories in some significant way (Alvesson & Sandberg, AMJ, 2011). The critical element is to ask the “ right ,” totally original , and creative research questions . Did you challenge any assumptions? Did you offer any counter-intuitive discoveries ? If your findings support hypotheses as expected, then, why do we need another study to find out? 23. Please also make sure that you frame your research question properly (Colquitt & George, 2011) and include all these aforementioned elements in your paper. Colquitt J, et al., 2011 (Ref 11) 24. Further, it is vitally important that you step back, think deeply, and articulate clearly and explicitly: What was your value-added contribution to the literature? Did you articulate forcefully what we learned in this new paper that we did not know before? The theory is how we move to further research and improved practice. If a manuscript contains no theory, people may question its value. 25. Please read the following article and understand where you stand regarding your contributions in theoretical terms ( theory building and theory testing ): Did you develop a new theory? What theories are you trying to test in this paper? With a good understanding of these principles, then, you will be able to craft a better article than the present version in the future. Present an interesting story, attract readers’ interests, and get readers hooked, wanting to know more about your study. Highlight the theoretical glue that connects all the constructs and paths, telling an exciting story. Enhance critical components that make an article exciting, innovative, novel, and counter-intuitively interesting. 26. The authors explore the ethical issues from the evolutionary moral psychology perspective. This reminds me of Richard Dawkins’ 1976 book, The Selfish Gene , a very interesting and influential idea in scientific and popular thought. You may want to dive deeper into this issue in your theory, hypotheses, and measurement of constraints. 27. You state: “More specifically, few studies focus on follower-leader moral value congruence.” I offer the following comments regarding the use of this term. 28. We find a lot more than “ few studies ”. Following Leader-Member Exchange, LMX, the traditional and logical flow of influence is from “the leader” to “the followers”. Scholars have considered person-supervisor fit, the trickle-down effect, and leader-follower value congruence . Please see also Tang et al. (2018b, 2023), discussed below. Since managers are nested in a country, CPI at the country level, a Level 2 variable, “exerts a greater downward influence on” individual dishonesty than vice versa (Andersson et al., 2014: 1068). (Tang et al. 2023, p. 931-932) Andersson U, et al., 2014 (Ref 12) 29. I listed 6 studies related to the trickle-down effect and 20 papers on value congruence as examples. 30. Following your Table 2, you have three items for each of the seven Constructs, X1 to X7, (3*7 = 21), and 10 items for Perceived ethical leadership (21 + 10 = 31). In sum, you have 31 items in your study. Please note that you need more constructs for your dependent variables in your formative SEM model. When you consider the number of participants in your study, you need to have a ratio of at least 10 participants for each item on your survey questionnaire ( N = 310). For a better ratio of 15, you need 465 participants. 31. After reading your Population and Sampling section, I am very disappointed regarding your sample size ( N = 56 ) which is significantly lower than the expected value ( N = 310 ; or N = 465 ). 32. Tell our readers about this particular study’s context and the backgrounds of these participants in Russia . Whetten (2009) discussed contributions of theory and contributions to theory together with theories in context and theories of context . Please read the whole special issue of Management and Organization Review . 33. Since you use the original scales published in the English literature and translate them into the Russian language, did you check the measurement invariance or equivalence of these constructs in a new country, Russia? Please see Tang et al. (2006) for an exemplary demonstration of conducting measurement invariance/equivalence. 34. Did you check the Common Method Variance (CMV) issue in a study using a cross-sectional design? MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011). Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quarterly , 35 (2), 293-334. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88, 879-903. 35. To summarize, please update your literature review, select top research publications in prestigious journals with high-impact factors as your role models, and study, learn, understand, and cite the most recent developments in your research. Identify the gaps, deficiencies, and inconsistencies, develop a strong theory, and explore your niche by selecting proper theoretical constructs and measurement instruments with the highest reliability and validity so that you can resolve the above issues. The design of your empirical study and the development of your theory are the most essential parts of your research. 36. Please delete all the unnecessary Tables (e.g., null hypotheses, Tables 9 and 22, raw data, pairwise Pearson, measures across genders, age groups, and organizational levels) at the “individual item level”. These Tables make no theoretical or empirical contribution. 37. You should articulate what the readers have learned that they did not know before. The theory is how we move to further research and improved practice. Please also show the “aha” (what is new?) and “so-what” (what can you do with this new finding?) in your paper. A good article should have these attributes. Please make it explicit and flush your ideas out right in Introduction and Discussion: What, How, Why, and Who, Where, and When. Do you challenge any assumptions? Do you offer any counter-intuitive discoveries ? Following your literature review, your hypotheses and findings are obvious. Why do we need another study? 38. Finally, carefully craft each word to enhance cognitive ease and associative coherence so that your paper will be simple, memorable, insightful, rhymed , and easy to read, according to Dr. Daniel Kahneman, the 2002 Nobel Prize Winner in Economic Sciences. I hope that you can respond to my concerns above and revise your paper accordingly in your future research. Thank you very much for allowing me to review your work. Good luck with your research. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? No Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly References 1. Bartunek J, Rynes S, Ireland R: What Makes Management Research Interesting, And Why Does It Matter?. Academy of Management Journal . 2006; 49 (1): 9-15 Publisher Full Text 2. Boghrati R, Berger J, Packard G: Style, content, and the success of ideas. Journal of Consumer Psychology . 2023; 33 (4): 688-700 Publisher Full Text 3. Johns G: Reflections on the 2016 Decade Award: Incorporating Context in Organizational Research. Academy of Management Review . 2017; 42 (4): 577-595 Publisher Full Text 4. Rousseau D, Fried Y: Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research*. Journal of Organizational Behavior . 2001; 22 (1): 1-13 Publisher Full Text 5. Tsui A: Editor's Introduction – Autonomy of Inquiry: Shaping the Future of Emerging Scientific Communities. Management and Organization Review . 2009; 5 (1): 1-14 Publisher Full Text 6. Whetten D: An Examination of the Interface between Context and Theory Applied to the Study of Chinese Organizations. Management and Organization Review . 2009; 5 (1): 29-56 Publisher Full Text 7. Grant A, Pollock T: Publishing inAMJ —Part 3: Setting the Hook. Academy of Management Journal . 2011; 54 (5): 873-879 Publisher Full Text 8. Alvesson M, Sandberg J: Generating Research Questions Through Problematization. Academy of Management Review . 2011; 36 (2): 247-271 Publisher Full Text 9. Thomas D, Cuervo-Cazurra A, Brannen M: From the Editors: Explaining theoretical relationships in international business research: Focusing on the arrows, NOT the boxes. Journal of International Business Studies . 2011; 42 (9): 1073-1078 Publisher Full Text 10. Sutton R, Staw B: What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly . 1995; 40 (3). Publisher Full Text 11. Colquitt J, George G: Publishing inAMJ —Part 1: Topic Choice. Academy of Management Journal . 2011; 54 (3): 432-435 Publisher Full Text 12. Andersson U, Cuervo-Cazurra A, Nielsen B: From the Editors: Explaining interaction effects within and across levels of analysis. Journal of International Business Studies . 2014; 45 (9): 1063-1071 Publisher Full Text Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Work Motivation, Monetary Wisdom, the Love of Money Attitudes, Monetary Aspirations, Business Ethics, Behavioral Economics, Cross-cultural studies I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Li-Ping Tang T. Reviewer Report For: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.168158.r350483 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1#referee-response-350483 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 03 Dec 2024 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 Version 1 03 Dec 24 read Thomas Li-Ping Tang , Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, USA Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Li-Ping Tang T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 23 Jan 2025 | for Version 1 Thomas Li-Ping Tang , Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, USA 0 Views copyright © 2025 Li-Ping Tang T. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Title: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case I offer my review comments below. The authors of this paper provide an interesting review of the literature, present several hypotheses, collect data from 56 participants of a Russian logistics company in Moscow’s HQ, and present some interesting expected and unexpected results. The authors have engaged a great deal of work into the design, conduct, analysis, and write-up of this paper. I have enjoyed reading this paper. My goal of this review is to help authors improve their presentation of ideas and enhance value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the journal, F1000Research , specifically, and the field of management and business ethics, in general. I offer the following comments with the hope of helping authors maximize their value-added contributions and future citations. 1. First, authors must demonstrate the extent to which their article makes specific, significant, and value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the literature: theoretical (41%), empirical (42%), and practical (17%) (Rynes, 2005). Interestingly, theoretical and empirical contributions are equally important. Bartunek J, et al., 2005 (Ref 1) 2. For the Title of your article, we must create a good first impression to attract readers’ attention and their future citations. Please incorporate the following ideas into your Title. Following Search Engine Optimization (SEO) , Springer’s instructions for authors recommend that your title’s first 55 characters with space be brief and contain words that are useful for indexing. Authors must write succinctly, focus on what is important, and delete unnecessary words. Think: “ W hat’s I mportant N ow ( WIN )? Holtz, L. (2006). Wins, losses, and lessons: An autobiography . HarperCollins. According to Leonardo da Vinci: Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. 3. Does your main Title capture the most significant aspect of your study? Please ask an interesting question as the main title and provide the answers in the subtitle. Please demonstrate: Why is this important? Why do we want to know? 4. To simplify, please consider the following suggestion: Perceived moral values congruence impacts ethical leadership: Evidence from Russia 5. Abstract, Methods. I would expect to see more details regarding your study, e.g., the contextualization (location of your data collection), the population, your sample, and sample size. I assume that you are very proud of this study because you have collected your data in Russia, a very unique and special sample. Thus, you must highlight these bright spots in your Title, Abstract, and Keywords. See my point #2. 6. Readers and the AI’s search engine optimization (SEO) will identify your published article more quickly and present it at the very top of the search results, if you repeat these critical constructs in your Title, Abstract, and Keywords. 7. Results: Please change/edit your statement to: ( r (54) = [.34; .64], p < .05). Please make corrections throughout the article. The letters “ r ” and “ p ” have special meaning in statistics. 8. In the following article, the authors identify 28,774 articles and explore the writing styles and citation count. Boghrati R, et al., 2023 (Ref 2) To increase your communications’ impact, please use first person, present tense, active voice , and emotional language to increase readers’ arousal, feelings, and memory, and enhance future citations. Please re-write your whole article following the instructions below: Functional words explain 4% of the overall variance explained and 11% of language’s impact on citations. Use Present tense: It helps make the content current, in the moment (literature review), revealing its importance and impact. Use First-person pronouns, like “I” or “we”: It helps authors take personal ownership of arguments, hypotheses, findings, and contributions, impress readers as knowledgeable, important, and impactful, and have authority, power, and success. Use Indefinite articles (i.e., “a” or “an”): It makes content much broader and generally applicable than definite articles (i.e., “the”). Use First-person (“I” or “we”), fewer articles, or prepositions. Simpler front ends will lead to high citations. Use Active Voice : For example, we conducted this research. We collected the data. Avoid Passive Voice : For example, research was conducted. Data were collected. Use Emotional Language: Don’t just cite numbers and statistics. Do provide real examples and demonstrate the consequences of critical events. Corruption caused the destruction of Enron and Arthur Andersen, the incarceration of executives, and the disruption of 110,000 employees' careers worldwide. (Tang et al., 2023, p. 927). 9. Incorporate contextualization into theoretical and practical implications. Can you find these patterns only in Russia or other cultures (nations)? Why? Why not? Johns G, 2017 (Ref 3) Rousseau D, et al., 2001 (Ref 4) Tsui A, 2009 (Ref 5) Whetten D, 2009 (Ref 6) 10. Introduction. I expect to read the three-page Introduction with the following expectations. An exemplary Introduction serves three significant purposes and attempts explicitly to (1) show the significance of the topic, “hook” readers’ interest, attract their attention, and motivate them to read further, (2) identify the theoretical gaps, inconsistencies, controversies, and deficiencies of this topic in the literature, and (3) provide a brief preview of your specific value-added theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions to the literature that will fill the gaps and resolve these issues. The award-winning authors had written the same Introduction, on average, ten (10) times , before they published their articles. Grant A, et al., 2011 (Ref 7) Hemingway took writing very seriously. Hence his quote: “ Don’t get discouraged because there’s a lot of mechanical work to writing…I rewrote the first part of A Farwell to Arms at least fifty (50) times ”. 11. In your Introduction, you state: “Curry (2016) proposed the morality-as-cooperation (MAC) theory ”. I use this term, search the Scopus database, and find 30 articles: 10 in 2024, 5 in 2023, 4 in 2022, 7 in 2021, 3 in 2020, and 2 in 2019. I take a quick look. You have not cited any of these 10 articles published in 2024 on your Reference list. It appears that your literature review is dated . Please keep it current and up to date. 12. Develop a robust theory in the Introduction. Show your theoretical model, list all the constructs, and explain the relationships among these components. You mention nothing regarding Relevance and Judgment in your theory until the Measurement section and Table 2. Don’t “surprise” your readers. 13. Please read Curry, Mullins, and Whitehouse’s (2019) interesting cross-cultural study, digest the contents carefully, identify the gaps, and quote key ideas to set it up for your current research. 14. To help you revise this paper and identify the gap of the literature, I offer my suggestions below: In Curry et al.’s (2019) article, we discover several important clues that demonstrate the robust theoretical and empirical gaps in the literature. We list them briefly below. In their reply to several eminent authors’ comments at the end of their article, the authors mention that “Bloom questions whether MAC is a ‘psychological theory’” (Curry et al., 2019, p. 63). “Hence moral value will exhibit a multifactorial structure, varying on these seven dimensions” (p. 63). “Further research will be needed to test the subsequent prediction that individual (and cultural) differences in moral values will reflect the value of cooperation at different stages of development (Curry 2005:182; Sheskin et al. 2014), and under different social conditions” (Curry et al., 2019: 63-64). “Moreover, the authors observe that they ‘were not able to measure within- or between-society variations” (p. 63). Following Curry et al.’s (2019) excellent points above, the present study answers their calls, expands “the theory of Morality-as-Cooperation” (MAC) developed, qualitatively, in the field of anthropology to a new context, and treats Morality-as-Cooperation as a “psychological theory” (p. 63). We apply MAC’s multifactorial structure and explore this construct’s impact on individuals’ ethical behaviors, a brand-new perspective in a new academic field to establish it validity. Empirically, we collect data from Russia, a highly under-researched region of the world. To the best of our knowledge, no researchers have investigated the MAC construct among citizens in Russia. We apply recent advanced and powerful measurement theory (formative vs. reflective models), structural equation modeling (SEM) technique (IBM SPSS Amos), and investigate individuals’ potential within- and between-subjects differences. A formative SEM model allows us to treat MAC’s seven dimensions as independent and yoked antecedents of the unmeasured latent construct, MAC, which leads to the outcome variables. We test the theoretical SEM model across genders, age groups, and organizational levels using Mult-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCF). These methods allow researchers to identify the relative contributions of MAC’s seven subconstructs to the latent construct, MAC, and the consequences, and examine within- and between-subjects differences across various contexts. Scholars can simultaneously inspect the correlations among these seven subconstructs. Specifically, MAC’s seven independent dimensions may make positive or negative, and significant or non-significant, contributions to the latent construct and the outcomes. Our study’s novel findings offer robust theoretical, empirical, and practical implications to the management and business ethics literature. [Here I am showing you that ideally this is what you can do. You must have a large sample size ( N = 456) and additional outcome variables to accomplish these objectives. If you have data from more than 30 countries, then follow the 30*30 rule to conduct cross-level analysis. See more discussion on these issues below] 15. According to Curt Lewin: “There is nothing more practical than a good theory”. Please also see Tang (2024b) below: Tang, T. L. P. (2024b). Monetary Wisdom: Crafting an inspirational, memorable, and practical theory. In Tang, T. L. P. (Ed.) (2024). Monetary wisdom: Monetary aspirations impact decision-making. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, An Imprint of Elsevier. Paperback ISBN: 9780443154539; eBook ISBN: 9780443154546 A theory is an explanation. It takes a blizzard of facts and observations and explains your key ideas in the most basic terms . A theory is incomplete and oversimplified. However, it helps readers understand. An excellent paper has a strong theory. 16. A good paper with a strong theory should have well-constructed logical arguments, rich and novel insight, adequate conceptual development, and a deep appreciation for the relevant literature. Please read the following articles for more information. Alvesson M, et al., 2011 (Ref 8) Tang, T. L. P. (2021). Creating inspirational, memorable, and practical theories: The lessons of The Last Supper . In G. R. Ferris, P. L. Perrewé, & A. Akande (Eds.). Emerging trends in global organizational science phenomena: Critical roles of politics, leadership, stress, and context (Chapter 9, 183-195). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers. Here are some guidelines for reviewing papers submitted to top journals (or the Academy of Management annual conference). Please ask yourself and examine your composition from the Reviewer’s perspective:  Introduction Is there a clear research question with a solid motivation behind it? Is the research question interesting? After reading the introduction, did you find yourself motivated to read further?  Theory Does the submission contain a well-developed and articulated theoretical framework? Are the core concepts of the submission clearly defined? Is the logic behind the hypotheses persuasive? Is extant literature appropriately reflected in the submission, or are critical references missing? Do the hypotheses or propositions logically flow from the theory? 17. Besides, please follow Steve Jobs’ mantra: “Focus and Simplify.” See also Adam Grant’s 2016 book on Originals . The 1986 Nobel Laureate in Economic Sciences, Prof. James M. Buchanan, stated: “Economics requires expository writing skills, logical structures of analysis, and a grounding in ultimate reality.” On November 21, 1991, James M. Buchanan revealed the secret to his success: “Hard work, a sense of self-confidence, a willingness to challenge all authority, scientific or otherwise”. Albert Szent-Gyorgi (born in Budapest, Hungary, the 1937 Nobel Laureate in Physiology or Medicine, discovered Vitamin C and its components) stated: “Discovery consists of seeing what everyone has seen, and thinking what no one has thought”. Did you cite an interesting story to attract readers’ attention? Is your research relevant to real people in ultimate reality ? This is sadly missing. 18. Specifically, your Introduction leads readers to a theoretical model. Please explain the components of your model and the relationships among these components. Please spell out all these constructs clearly and explicitly. Provide an overarching theoretical model. Define all key constructs at the beginning of your Theory and Hypothesis. 19. Provide detailed theoretical arguments (research findings) regarding how and why the relationship between X and Y is moderated and mediated by other variables (M and Z). Explain all the theoretical arguments regarding arrows in your model, not just the boxes . Thomas D, et al., 2011 (Ref 9) 20 As Sutton and Staw stated: “But it still contained no discussion of what these theories were about and no discussion of the logical arguments why these theories led to the author’s predictions ” (1995: 373). “ Data describe which empirical patterns were observed and theory explains why empirical patterns were observed or are expected to be observed” (p. 374). Sutton R, et al., 1995 (Ref 10) 21. A complete theory must have the following elements: What, How, Why, Who, Where, and When . An interesting paper has the following two critical ingredients: (1) “aha” (what is new here?) and (2) “so-what” (what can researchers and practitioners do with these new findings?). These components were missing. 22. What makes a theory interesting, notable, influential, and famous? When researchers see a good theory, they find that the theory is not only true but also more importantly, it is challenging the assumptions underlying existing theories in some significant way (Alvesson & Sandberg, AMJ, 2011). The critical element is to ask the “ right ,” totally original , and creative research questions . Did you challenge any assumptions? Did you offer any counter-intuitive discoveries ? If your findings support hypotheses as expected, then, why do we need another study to find out? 23. Please also make sure that you frame your research question properly (Colquitt & George, 2011) and include all these aforementioned elements in your paper. Colquitt J, et al., 2011 (Ref 11) 24. Further, it is vitally important that you step back, think deeply, and articulate clearly and explicitly: What was your value-added contribution to the literature? Did you articulate forcefully what we learned in this new paper that we did not know before? The theory is how we move to further research and improved practice. If a manuscript contains no theory, people may question its value. 25. Please read the following article and understand where you stand regarding your contributions in theoretical terms ( theory building and theory testing ): Did you develop a new theory? What theories are you trying to test in this paper? With a good understanding of these principles, then, you will be able to craft a better article than the present version in the future. Present an interesting story, attract readers’ interests, and get readers hooked, wanting to know more about your study. Highlight the theoretical glue that connects all the constructs and paths, telling an exciting story. Enhance critical components that make an article exciting, innovative, novel, and counter-intuitively interesting. 26. The authors explore the ethical issues from the evolutionary moral psychology perspective. This reminds me of Richard Dawkins’ 1976 book, The Selfish Gene , a very interesting and influential idea in scientific and popular thought. You may want to dive deeper into this issue in your theory, hypotheses, and measurement of constraints. 27. You state: “More specifically, few studies focus on follower-leader moral value congruence.” I offer the following comments regarding the use of this term. 28. We find a lot more than “ few studies ”. Following Leader-Member Exchange, LMX, the traditional and logical flow of influence is from “the leader” to “the followers”. Scholars have considered person-supervisor fit, the trickle-down effect, and leader-follower value congruence . Please see also Tang et al. (2018b, 2023), discussed below. Since managers are nested in a country, CPI at the country level, a Level 2 variable, “exerts a greater downward influence on” individual dishonesty than vice versa (Andersson et al., 2014: 1068). (Tang et al. 2023, p. 931-932) Andersson U, et al., 2014 (Ref 12) 29. I listed 6 studies related to the trickle-down effect and 20 papers on value congruence as examples. 30. Following your Table 2, you have three items for each of the seven Constructs, X1 to X7, (3*7 = 21), and 10 items for Perceived ethical leadership (21 + 10 = 31). In sum, you have 31 items in your study. Please note that you need more constructs for your dependent variables in your formative SEM model. When you consider the number of participants in your study, you need to have a ratio of at least 10 participants for each item on your survey questionnaire ( N = 310). For a better ratio of 15, you need 465 participants. 31. After reading your Population and Sampling section, I am very disappointed regarding your sample size ( N = 56 ) which is significantly lower than the expected value ( N = 310 ; or N = 465 ). 32. Tell our readers about this particular study’s context and the backgrounds of these participants in Russia . Whetten (2009) discussed contributions of theory and contributions to theory together with theories in context and theories of context . Please read the whole special issue of Management and Organization Review . 33. Since you use the original scales published in the English literature and translate them into the Russian language, did you check the measurement invariance or equivalence of these constructs in a new country, Russia? Please see Tang et al. (2006) for an exemplary demonstration of conducting measurement invariance/equivalence. 34. Did you check the Common Method Variance (CMV) issue in a study using a cross-sectional design? MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2011). Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research: Integrating new and existing techniques. MIS Quarterly , 35 (2), 293-334. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88, 879-903. 35. To summarize, please update your literature review, select top research publications in prestigious journals with high-impact factors as your role models, and study, learn, understand, and cite the most recent developments in your research. Identify the gaps, deficiencies, and inconsistencies, develop a strong theory, and explore your niche by selecting proper theoretical constructs and measurement instruments with the highest reliability and validity so that you can resolve the above issues. The design of your empirical study and the development of your theory are the most essential parts of your research. 36. Please delete all the unnecessary Tables (e.g., null hypotheses, Tables 9 and 22, raw data, pairwise Pearson, measures across genders, age groups, and organizational levels) at the “individual item level”. These Tables make no theoretical or empirical contribution. 37. You should articulate what the readers have learned that they did not know before. The theory is how we move to further research and improved practice. Please also show the “aha” (what is new?) and “so-what” (what can you do with this new finding?) in your paper. A good article should have these attributes. Please make it explicit and flush your ideas out right in Introduction and Discussion: What, How, Why, and Who, Where, and When. Do you challenge any assumptions? Do you offer any counter-intuitive discoveries ? Following your literature review, your hypotheses and findings are obvious. Why do we need another study? 38. Finally, carefully craft each word to enhance cognitive ease and associative coherence so that your paper will be simple, memorable, insightful, rhymed , and easy to read, according to Dr. Daniel Kahneman, the 2002 Nobel Prize Winner in Economic Sciences. I hope that you can respond to my concerns above and revise your paper accordingly in your future research. Thank you very much for allowing me to review your work. Good luck with your research. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? No Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? No Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly References 1. Bartunek J, Rynes S, Ireland R: What Makes Management Research Interesting, And Why Does It Matter?. Academy of Management Journal . 2006; 49 (1): 9-15 Publisher Full Text 2. Boghrati R, Berger J, Packard G: Style, content, and the success of ideas. Journal of Consumer Psychology . 2023; 33 (4): 688-700 Publisher Full Text 3. Johns G: Reflections on the 2016 Decade Award: Incorporating Context in Organizational Research. Academy of Management Review . 2017; 42 (4): 577-595 Publisher Full Text 4. Rousseau D, Fried Y: Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research*. Journal of Organizational Behavior . 2001; 22 (1): 1-13 Publisher Full Text 5. Tsui A: Editor's Introduction – Autonomy of Inquiry: Shaping the Future of Emerging Scientific Communities. Management and Organization Review . 2009; 5 (1): 1-14 Publisher Full Text 6. Whetten D: An Examination of the Interface between Context and Theory Applied to the Study of Chinese Organizations. Management and Organization Review . 2009; 5 (1): 29-56 Publisher Full Text 7. Grant A, Pollock T: Publishing inAMJ —Part 3: Setting the Hook. Academy of Management Journal . 2011; 54 (5): 873-879 Publisher Full Text 8. Alvesson M, Sandberg J: Generating Research Questions Through Problematization. Academy of Management Review . 2011; 36 (2): 247-271 Publisher Full Text 9. Thomas D, Cuervo-Cazurra A, Brannen M: From the Editors: Explaining theoretical relationships in international business research: Focusing on the arrows, NOT the boxes. Journal of International Business Studies . 2011; 42 (9): 1073-1078 Publisher Full Text 10. Sutton R, Staw B: What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly . 1995; 40 (3). Publisher Full Text 11. Colquitt J, George G: Publishing inAMJ —Part 1: Topic Choice. Academy of Management Journal . 2011; 54 (3): 432-435 Publisher Full Text 12. Andersson U, Cuervo-Cazurra A, Nielsen B: From the Editors: Explaining interaction effects within and across levels of analysis. Journal of International Business Studies . 2014; 45 (9): 1063-1071 Publisher Full Text Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Work Motivation, Monetary Wisdom, the Love of Money Attitudes, Monetary Aspirations, Business Ethics, Behavioral Economics, Cross-cultural studies I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Li-Ping Tang T. Peer Review Report For: Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived level of ethical leadership: A Russophone organization case [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] . F1000Research 2024, 13 :1472 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.168158.r350483) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1#referee-response-350483 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Influence of perceived congruence in basic...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Belinskiy A and Olsen C'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472", templates : { twitter : "Influence of perceived congruence in basic moral values on perceived.... Belinskiy A and Olsen C, published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/13-1472/v1" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/153281/168158") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "168158"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "345861": 0, "345860": 0, "345863": 0, "345862": 0, "345857": 0, "345856": 0, "345859": 0, "345858": 0, "354829": 0, "354831": 0, "350479": 0, "354830": 0, "350478": 0, "354837": 0, "350485": 0, "354836": 0, "350484": 0, "350487": 0, "354838": 0, "350486": 0, "354833": 0, "350481": 0, "354832": 0, "350480": 0, "354835": 0, "350483": 9, "354834": 0, "350482": 0, "390326": 0, "363997": 0, "363996": 0, "389215": 0, "363999": 0, "363998": 0, "389221": 0, "364005": 0, "389220": 0, "364004": 0, "389222": 0, "389217": 0, "364001": 0, "389216": 0, "364000": 0, "389219": 0, "364003": 0, "389218": 0, "364002": 0, "362861": 0, "362860": 0, "362863": 0, "362862": 0, "389225": 0, "389224": 0, "362859": 0, "362868": 0, "362865": 0, "362864": 0, "362867": 0, "362866": 0, "345855": 0, "345854": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "2ed5c1ea-ae0b-41e3-84f5-47cb31bd8cc4"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });