Soothing the Ego: Self-Compassion Improves Performance via Humility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An emerging body of research indicates that expressed humility is an adaptive quality that is positively related to organizationally-relevant outcomes. However, less is known about the antecedents to expressed humility. Across three mixed-methods studies, we draw from research on self-enhancement and ego threat to explore the relationship between self-compassion, expressed humility, and interpersonal organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBI). In Study 1, we show through cross-sectional self-report data that self-compassion is positively associated with OCBI, and that this relationship is mediated by expressed humility. In Study 2, we replicate this finding with peer-report data from a sample of managers attending an EMBA program. In Study 3, we use experimental methods to examine the conditions under which self-compassion is especially helpful for bolstering humility and show that it is more likely to do so in the presence of negative performance feedback (i.e., ego threatening information). These findings contribute to the nascent literature on humility in organizational settings and answer the call to better understand the antecedents to expressed humility as well as its relation with performance outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".