Consequences of other relevant concepts

Wellbeing

Researchers have recently developed a concept that is a quiet ego—a concept that overlaps with humility.  Like humble individuals, people who experience a quiet ego are aware of their attributes rather than defensive, feel a sense of belonging or affiliation with all humans rather than special, appreciate the perspectives of other people, fostering compassion, and strive to develop and learn from their experiences rather than demonstrate their capabilities (Wayment et al., 2015).  To measure a quiet ego, participants complete measures of these qualities, specifically detached awareness, inclusive identity, perspective taking, and growth-mindedness. This quiet ego has been shown to predict many favourable outcomes, such as happiness and wellbeing.

Many studies have explored the reasons that a quiet ego tends to improve wellbeing.  For example, as Liu et al. (2021) revealed, a quiet ego tends to foster mindfulness and improve emotional intelligence enhancing wellbeing and diminishing stress.  Specifically, when individuals experience a quiet ego, they can observe themselves from the perspective of someone else, objectively and fairly, called detached awareness.  Because of this detachment, they do not feel concerned about how their circumstances or surroundings reflect or affect their status or attributes.  They can thus observe these circumstances or surroundings, impartially and without judgment, epitomising mindfulness.

Similarly, a quiet ego, coupled with mindfulness, can foster emotional intelligence—or the capacity of individuals to recognise, utilise, apply, and manage emotions helpfully.  To illustrate,

• if individuals adopt a quiet ego and thus appreciate the perspectives of other people, they can more readily imagine, decipher, and accommodate the emotions these people experience,
• likewise, if individuals are mindful, they can observe themselves and other people, and hence appraise their emotions, more accurately. 

This emotional intelligence enables people to resolve challenges, such as conflicts with other individuals, more effectively, enhancing wellbeing and diminishing stress.  A survey of 300 participants that included measures of a quiet ego, mindfulness, emotional intelligence, life satisfaction, and stress, generated results that substantiate these arguments. 

Likewise, in an experimental study, Liu, Isbell, Constantino, and Leidner (2022) confirmed that a quiet ego may foster emotional intelligence.  In this study, half the participants were assigned to a program that was designed to foster a quiet ego.  Specifically, participants listened to an audio recording, lasting six minutes, that delineated the four key features of a quiet ego. They learned that people who adopt a quiet ego balance their personal interests with the needs of other individuals.  Next, they completed a reflective exercise in which they contemplated how they could apply these lessons to their lives. In the control condition, participants to an audio recording, of similar length, on the natural history of ledges.  Participants who learned about a quiet ego subsequently reported higher levels of emotional intelligence and flourishing in life.

Yet, many other pathways can also explain this association between a quiet ego and wellbeing.  Liu, Isbell, and Leidner (2022) proposed that a quiet ego might also foster an inclination called self-concept clarity—or the degree to which individuals perceive their qualities and capabilities as unambiguous rather than hazy or conflicting.  Presumably, when individuals experience a quiet ego, they are not as inclined to inflate their qualities to themselves.  Their perceptions of themselves, thus, will be more consistent over time and compatible with the feedback they receive, promoting self-concept clarity. 

Armed with this clarity, individuals are more likely to reach suitable choices.  They gravitate to activities that are compatible with their values, interests, and capabilities.  They also embrace activities that may address their limitations, facilitating growth.  Because of these suitable choices, individuals who experience self-concept clarity, partly derived from their quiet ego, should experience satisfaction with their life.   Indeed, Liu, Isbell, and Leidner (2022) discovered, after conducting a survey of 500 participants, that self-concept clarity does indeed mediate the relationship between a quiet ego and various indices of wellbeing, such as purpose in life, autonomy, and trusting relationships.   

A quiet ego might also inspire individuals to adopt a more authentic lifestyle.  Pradhan et al. (2025), for example, demonstrated that individuals who experience a quiet ego report greater authenticity.  They tend to choose actions or verbalise opinions that resonate with their values rather than feel the urge to conform to societal expectations.  Presumably, a quiet ego, in which people observe themselves impartially, enables individuals to appreciate their values and understand their motives.  Consequently, they can more readily choose actions that resonate with these values and motives. 

Similarly, because of this quiet ego and authenticity, these individuals may not feel as inclined to flaunt their wealth or status.  They will not, therefore, purchase unnecessary possessions to symbolise this rank.  Consistent with this possibility, Pradhan et al. (2025) showed that a quiet ego is also associated with voluntary simplicity or a decision to refrain from unnecessary consumption or purchases.  Both the authenticity and simplicity that emanate from a quiet ego also predicted the degree to which these individuals perceive their life as meaningful and rewarding.  

Prevalence of psychopathic leaders

According to many commentators, some of the qualities that characterise psychopathic individuals, such as boldness, may enable people to ascend into leadership positions.  If this argument is correct, at least some facets of psychopathy should be positively associated with the inclination or capacity of individuals to become leaders, called leadership emergence.

A variety of studies have explored whether psychopathy is positively or negatively related to leadership emergence.  These studies, however, have uncovered some conflicting results.  For example

• according to some research, the facets of psychopathy that revolves around interpersonal manipulation and callous affect, such as social influence, stress immunity, and fearlessness, are positively related to annual income and rank or position in the organisation (Howe et al., 2014),
• similarly, antisocial personality disorder is positively associated with the number of subordinates (Wille et al., 2013),
• yet, other research has revealed that psychopathy, as defined in measures of the dark triad, are not significantly associated with salary or position in the corporate hierarchy (e.g., Spurk et al., 2016)—whereas narcissism is positively associated with salary (Spurk et al., 2016)

To reconcile these differences, Landay et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis.  This study uncovered 46 samples in which the researchers collected information about psychopathy and leadership emergence, such as rank or position, the duration before this person was promoted to a leadership position, number of leadership positions, or peer ratings of whether this person demonstrated leadership.  To analyse these data, the researchers utilised the interactive meta-analytic method, recommended by Schmidt and Hunter (2004), that utilises a random-effects model.  This analysis revealed that

• psychopathic tendencies were positively related to most facets of leadership emergence, except the peer ratings,
• the strength of these relationships, however, were only modest rather than pronounced,
• these results imply that individuals who demonstrate psychopathy are more likely to become corporate leaders than are the average person but only to a limited extent.

Effectiveness of psychopathic leaders

Commentators often assume that psychopathic leaders are not only prevalent but also ineffective.  Several publications have indeed revealed that psychopathic leaders can provoke a range of complications in organisations.  For example

• staff who rate their leaders as psychopathic, as measured by the B-Scan 360 (Babiak & Hare, 2012; see Mathieu et al., 2013), were more likely to be dissatisfied with their job, to withhold their effort at work, to feel unmotivated, and to consider leaving the organisation (Mathieu & Babiak, 2015),
• staff who rate their leaders as psychopathic were more likely to perpetrate counterproductive work behaviours (Boddy, 2014), such as waste resources or disobey instructions (for items, see Spector & Jex, 1998) as well as engage in conflicts.

Yet, some of these complications may not necessarily compromise job performance.  Similarly, some research has revealed that psychopathic leaders are sometimes evaluated favourably.  For example, as Babiak et al. (2010) revealed, leaders who exhibited high levels of psychopathy were also perceived as more charismatic, manifesting excellent communication skills and strategic thinking.   

To uncover more definitive conclusions on this relationship between psychopathy and the effectiveness of leaders, Landay et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis on 42 samples in which the researchers collected information about psychopathy and leadership effectiveness—including ratings from supervisors or staff on job performance.   The findings revealed that

• psychopathic leaders were evaluated as lower on job performance—as evaluated by their supervisors— but these associations were modest rather than pronounced,
• yet, psychopathic leaders were not as inclined to adopt leadership styles that tend to be beneficial, such as transformational leadership.  unnecessary possessions to symbolise this rank.   

Effect of psychopathic leaders on abusive supervision

As a variety of studies have demonstrated, when supervisors, managers, or other leaders show the signs of psychopathy, they are more likely to be abusive to their staff, epitomised by bullying and intimidation.  These studies include both qualitative research (e.g., Boddy et al, 2015) and quantitative research (e.g., Boddy, 2011; Lyons et al., 2019). 

For example, in one study, conducted by Laurijssen et al. (2024), 100 leaders evaluated the degree to which they exhibit the signs of primary psychopathy—defined as callous interpersonal behaviour and limited empathy or affect.  That is, they indicated the degree to which they agree with items like “I enjoy manipulating other people’s feelings” (for the Dutch version that was used, see Barelds et al., 2018).  In addition, to evaluate the degree to which this person demonstrates abusive behaviour, a subordinate of each leader completed the Abusive Supervision Scale (Tepper, 2000).  Specifically, these subordinates indicated the extent to which their supervisor perpetrates 15 abusive behaviours including

• ridicules me,
• tells me my thoughts or feelings are stupid,
• gives me the silent treatment,
• expresses negative comments about me to other people,
• does not allow me to interact with my coworkers,
• tells me that I am incompetent.

In general, leaders who reported psychopathy were more likely to behave abusively.  This result is significant because a variety of problems can be ascribed to abusive supervisors.   For example, when supervisors are abusive

• their staff are more likely to experience depression, anxiety, exhaustion, dissatisfaction with life, and other unpleasant states (Tepper, 2000),
• consequently, these staff are inclined to develop unfavourable attitudes towards their job, such as job dissatisfaction and diminished commitment to their organisation (Tepper, 2000),
• in addition, these staff do not perform as efficiently, generating fewer products or outputs (e.g., Walter et al., 2015).

Accordingly, some research has explored the conditions or practices that may diminish the association between leader psychopathy and abusive behaviour.  For example, in their study of the relationship between leader psychopathy and abusive behaviour, Laurijssen et al. showed that rule clarity moderated this relationship.  That is, when organisations disseminated unambiguous rules about how staff should conduct themselves, the positive association between the primary psychopathy of leaders and their abusive behaviour declined and even reversed.  Psychopathic leaders, in these circumstances, were not as abusive.  Arguably,

• leaders who report primary psychopathy are sometimes unsure of which behaviours are deemed as acceptable,
• indeed, according to Raine (2019), the neural regions that underpin moral decisions—such as regions that include the superior temporal gyrus, angular gyrus, anterior cingulate, amygdala, and cortical regions—may be impaired in antisocial personality disorder and thus psychopathy,
• therefore, unambiguous rules can be informative to these individuals and improve their behaviour.