Understanding the Paradox of Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: Development and Validation of a New Thought Experiment Measure

Previous studies have highlighted the paradoxical nature of unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB), yet no measurement tools specifically targeting this paradox have been developed. This study introduces a new thought experiment measure based on the five-phase development framework by Hinkin (1995, 1998). Phase one, concept clarification, adopted the widely accepted UPB definition from Umphress et al. (2010). Phase two developed and initially validated seven UPB scenarios with high content and ecological validity, capturing the paradox that employees experience regarding UPB (Study 1). Phase three demonstrated that the employees’ UPB choices in these scenarios showed high internal consistency and structural validity (Study 2). Phase four demonstrated high criterion and discriminant validity compared to Umphress et al.’s UPB scale, along with high test-retest reliability (Study 3). Phase five examined the cognitive process underlying UPB through the lens of dual-process theory (Study 4). Cognitive load manipulations (with or without load) revealed that employees under cognitive load made faster decisions but exhibited lower UPB choice frequency, thereby supporting the paradoxical nature of UPB and its cognitive underpinnings. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.