UPB elicits various and heterogeneous subsequent behaviors through positive and negative emotions, a phenomenon that warrants a comprehensive meta-analysis. This study synthesized 34 studies from both English and Chinese databases (49 independent samples, N = 83,810), published between 2016 and 2024. The results reveal that positive emotions (e.g., pride, psychological entitlement) trigger the moral licensing effect of rationalizing further unethical conduct and the conscientiousness effect of enhancing organizational identification and promoting positive behaviors. Conversely, negative emotions (e.g., guilt, shame) drive the moral cleansing effect of motivating reparative moral behaviors. Additionally, negative emotions can also lead to the moral slippery slope effect of inducing unethical conduct. Moreover, moral disengagement was identified as a self-regulatory mechanism that permeates this entire process, enabling employees to navigate the moral conflicts arising from UPB. This study uncovers the dual nature of UPB from an emotional perspective.

According to the dual-process model of moral cognition, individuals tend to refuse the proposal of killing some to save more innocents under stressful conditions compared to non-stressful states, which has been demonstrated in previous studies. However, this effect might be unreliable according to the General Adaptation Syndrome theory and the Stress Process Model. To test this speculation, we reanalyzed the raw data on the effect of chronic stress on moral choice from a previous study (Study 1) and conducted a pre-registered replication and extension study (Study 2). Both results demonstrated no detectable effect of chronic stress on moral decisions, which is inconsistent with the original results. This study calls for caution regarding this effect and has important theoretical and practical implications.

According to the dual-process model of moral cognition, individuals tend to refuse the proposal of killing some to save more innocents under stressful conditions compared to non-stressful states, which has been demonstrated in previous studies. However, this effect might be unreliable according to the General Adaptation Syndrome theory and the Stress Process Model. To test this speculation, we reanalyzed the raw data on the effect of chronic stress on moral choice from a previous study (Study 1) and conducted a pre-registered replication and extension study (Study 2). Both results demonstrated no detectable effect of chronic stress on moral decisions, which is inconsistent with the original results. This study calls for caution regarding this effect and has important theoretical and practical implications.

Previous studies have revealed the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB) and have developed measures for investigating this phenomenon. However, it was not possible to ascertain whether the employees exhibited a low level of ethicality or a high degree of pro-organizational inclination when they made a UPB decision due to the limitations of the binary continuum. This study addresses the aforementioned gap by employing the process dissociation paradigm in three studies. The scenarios for process dissociation were carefully compiled and validated based on previous work (Study 1), and the reliability and validity of the new approach were tested (Study 2). The application of the new approach to independently measure the organizationality and ethicality dimensions of UPB facilitated the clarification of some mainstream theoretical explanations for UPB (Study 3). The phenomenon of moral disengagement, moral justification, and moral decoupling among employees engaged in UPB is associated with a reduced emphasis on ethical considerations and an enhanced pro-organizational disposition. Conversely, social exchange and organizational identification of employees involved in UPB are linked to a minorly diminished pro-organizational inclination and enhanced ethical considerations. The new measure offers a resolution to numerous theoretical controversies on UPB and is recommended for future studies.

Previous studies have highlighted the dilemmatic nature of UPB, characterized by paradoxical emotional responses and behavioral patterns. Underlying the paradox of UPB, there are three different psychological processes, Ethical/unethical sensitivity (E parameter), Pro-/anti-organizational sensitivity (P parameter) and overall Action/inaction preference (A parameter). A typical UPB can be attributed to lower E, higher P, higher A, or any combination of these factors. However, no existing measures effectively dissociate the three psychological processes. Present work addresses this gap by developing and validating a novel measure, the EPA model by applying the methodology in moral dilemma study. The structural scenarios were constructed and validated (Study 1, n=749). Validity and reliability of the EPA model were further tested (Study 2, n=150). With applying the EPA model in a multi-wave survey (Study 3, n=1097), we found that employees with stronger tendencies toward moral decoupling, disengagement and justification are more likely to engage in UPB. It can be explained by their lower ethical sensitivity, higher pro-organizational sensitivity, and higher overall action/inaction preference. The relationships between organizational identification, social exchange, future focus and UPB remain ambiguous across multiple methodologies, warranting further investigation. Future studies can use the EPA model to clarify the three psychological processes of UPB. Theoretical and methodological implications were discussed.