The link between interpersonal conflict and knowledge hiding: mediated by relatedness need frustration, moderated by narcissistic rivalry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between employees’ experience of interpersonal conflict and their engagement in knowledge hiding, according to a mediating effect of their relatedness need frustration and a moderating effect of their narcissistic rivalry. Design/methodology/approach The tests of the hypotheses rely on three-wave, time-lagged data collected among employees in Pakistan. Findings A critical reason that emotion-based fights stimulate people to conceal valuable knowledge from their coworkers is that these employees believe their needs for belongingness or relatedness are not being met. This mediating role of relatedness need frustration is particularly salient among employees who are self-centered and see others as rivals, with no right to fight with or give them a hard time. Practical implications The findings indicate how organizations might mitigate the risk that negative relationship dynamics among their employees escalate into dysfunctional knowledge hiding behavior. They should work to hire and retain employees who are benevolent and encourage them to see colleagues as allies instead of rivals. Originality/value This research unpacks the link between interpersonal conflict and knowledge hiding by explicating the unexplored roles of two critical factors (relatedness need frustration and narcissistic rivalry) in this relationship.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".