Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov 13;11:578419. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.578419

Table 5.

Results of mediation analysis using PROCESS (Model 4) in Study 2.

Independent variables Intuitive thinking style (M) Corruption (Y)
B SE t LCLI UCLI B SE t LCLI UCLI
Ethical leadership (X) 0.42** 0.15 2.79 0.17 0.67 −1.48** 0.23 6.19 −1.87 −1.08
Intuitive thinking style (M) −0.37** 0.12 2.90 −0.58 −0.16
F 7.78** 28.95**
R2 0.05** 0.28**
Direct and indirect effect B SE t LCLI UCLI
Direct effect of X on Y −1.48** 0.23 6.19 −1.87 −1.08
Indirect effect of X on Y via M −0.15 0.08 −0.30 −0.04

N = 146. LLCI, lower limit confident interval; UCLI, upper limit confidence interval. Ethical leadership were coded 0 = non-ethical leadership and 1 = ethical leadership. We report the bias-corrected and accelerated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated using 5,000 bootstrap samples.

**

p < 0.01.