Research on unethical leadership has predominantly focused on interpersonal and high-intensity forms of harmful leader behavior such as abusive supervision. Other forms of harmful leader behavior such as excessively pressuring subordinates or acting in self-centered ways have received less attention, despite being harmful and potentially occurring more frequently. We propose a model of four types of harmful leader behavior (HLB) varying in intensity (high vs low) and orientation (people/relationships or tasks/goals): Intimidation, Lack of Care, Self-Centeredness, and Excessive Pressure for Results. We map out how these relate to other constructs in the unethical leader behavior field in order to integrate the existing work on how leaders can cause harm to followers. Next, in five studies (N = 35, N = 218, N = 352, N = 160, N = 1921 in 196 teams), we develop and test a new survey instrument measuring the four proposed types of perceived HLB. We provide initial validity evidence for this new measure, establish its psychometric properties, and examine its nomological network by linking the four types of HLB to related leadership constructs and soft and hard outcome correlates at the individual and team level. We find that HLB is negatively related to constructive forms of leadership (e.g., ethical and transformational) and positively to unethical ones (e.g., abusive supervision). HLB is also related in the expected direction to job satisfaction, engagement, psychological safety, knowledge sharing, knowledge hiding, deviance, and objectively recorded team-level stress-related absenteeism.

Siblings of individuals with neurodevelopmental conditions (NDCs) are exposed to unique family environments and experience a range of psychosocial risk and resilience factors. Networks of self-reported risk, resilience, and neuropsychiatric variables were estimated for siblings of individuals with (n = 235) and without (n = 480) NDCs (N = 715, mean age 22.40 years, 76% female, 74% White Caucasian). The NDC group reported more depressive (g = 0.39) and anxious (g = 0.43) symptoms than controls, and 71.5% of the NDC group reported at least one neuropsychiatric diagnosis compared to 36.9% of controls. Self-reported sleep and post-traumatic stress disorders were high amongst NDC siblings. Everyday executive functioning difficulties (cognitive inflexibility, hyperactivity/impulsivity) and emotion dysregulation were the most influential transdiagnostic risk factors for poorer functioning within the NDC group network.

Given the ubiquity of exploration in everyday life, researchers from many disciplines have developed methods to measure exploratory behaviour. There are therefore many ways to quantify and measure exploration. However, it remains unclear whether the different measures (i) have convergent validity relative to one another, (ii) capture a domain general tendency, and (iii) capture a tendency that is stable across time. In a sample of 678 participants, we found very little evidence of convergent validity for the behavioural measures (Hypothesis 1); most of the behavioural measures lacked sufficient convergent validity with one another or with the self-reports. In psychometric modelling analyses, we could not identify a good fitting model with an assumed general tendency to explore (Hypothesis 2); the best fitting model suggested that the different behavioural measures capture behaviours that are specific to the tasks. In a subsample of 254 participants who completed the study a second time, we found that the measures had stability across an 1 month timespan (Hypothesis 3). Therefore, although there were stable individual differences in how people approached each task across time, there was no generalizability across tasks, and drawing broad conclusions about exploratory behaviour from studies using these tasks may be problematic. The Stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 2nd December 2022 https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21717407.v1. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/64QJU.