Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the determinants of ethical leadership and the manner in which they are associated with the directive, transactional, and transformational leadership styles, as well as their effects on organizational followers. A review is first conducted of the major theories of leadership and ethics, and current perspectives on ethical leadership are discussed. The determinants of ethical leadership are postulated to be altruism, manifested through some combination of teleological and deontological values, intellectual integrity, and moral integrity. A framework is then presented which integrates ethics and leadership by illustrating the proposed linkages among the ethics variables, leadership styles and effects on followers. This is followed by a series of hypotheses concerning the suggested relationships among the variables. The empirical investigation to test the hypotheses was conducted in a series of Canadian hospitals. Leaders were heads of various departments and services while followers were individuals who reported directly to the leader. Leader altruism was measured by a self-report questionnaire completed by the leaders themselves. Since leadership style and integrity are conceptualized as attributions by followers, all other variables were assessed via a self-report questionnaire having subordinates as respondents. The main findings of the thesis are the significant relationships between intellectual integrity and the three leadership styles compared with insignificant associations observed for moral integrity, as well as the stronger, although indirect, effects of leader intellectual integrity on subordinates compared with those for moral integrity. The thesis concludes with suggestions for future research and practical implications for management.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".