MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394821468 · doi:10.1108/ijem-01-2023-0035

The influence of dark triad on knowledge hiding behavior with workplace spirituality as a moderator in higher education institutions

2024· article· en· W4394821468 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Educational Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModerationMachiavellianismPsychologySocial psychologyNarcissismReligiosityPersonalityDark triadPsychopathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose In the knowledge management (KM) literature, there are umpteen discussions on knowledge sharing; however, the scholarly community still faces a dearth of literature on knowledge hiding behavior (KHB) and its determinants. The current study aims to examine the direct effect of dark triad (DT) personality dimensions (machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy) on KHB dimensions (rationalized hiding, evasive hiding and playing dumb). Drawing on social control theory, this study also explores the moderating effect of workplace spirituality (WS) on the direct relationship between DT and KHB. Design/methodology/approach Using purposive sampling, 281 matched-pair datasets from faculty members working with higher education institutions (HEI) in India have been obtained. The direct relationship has been tested through regression analysis and moderation analysis has been performed using the PROCESS macro for SPSS. Findings The study has successfully mapped DT dimensions with KHB dimensions, and it is observed that machiavellians mostly use evasive hiding, narcissists believe in rationalized hiding and paying dumb is mostly used by psychopaths. Workplace spirituality (WS) weakens the direct relationship between DT and KHB. Practical implications HEIs are advised to foster a climate conducive to WS by getting faculty to realize that their job is something larger than themselves through developing a sense of community among faculty members. Originality/value This empirical study extends the KM literature and expands the scope of bridging the gaps on KHB. It is one of the few studies to examine the impact of DT on KHB with WS as a moderator in HEIs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it