A study has shown that when leaders practice interpersonal fairness an

Question

A study has shown that when leaders practice interpersonal fairness and self-sacrifice, it increases positive emotions and behaviors in employees, and these qualities impact Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)—an employee's contribution to a constructive work environment, as evidenced in behaviors such as courtesy, compliance, and altruism (behaviors motivated by generous concern for others). Leaders’ fairness and self-sacrifice have also been shown to jointly increase employees' emotionally felt connection ("commitment") to the organization that employs them—which increases employee retention.

The research shows that both effects are mediated by an emotion known as elevation, the emotional response to the perception of moral excellence. Employees who recall morally elevating events are more likely to focus their thoughts and motivations on other employees and to desire to enhance relationships and make moral improvements.

Usernamevisible · Answer

Question 1

The question asks which hiring recommendation is most justified by the study. The correct approach is to focus only on variables that were actually examined.

Option A recommends avoiding very high salaries so that self-interested candidates are not attracted. This may sound related to self-sacrifice, but salary levels and financial motivation were never studied. Therefore, the recommendation is unsupported. Trap type: Outside-information trap.

Option B recommends excluding candidates who have no history of volunteerism or philanthropy. This may sound connected to self-sacrifice, but the study never examines volunteer work, philanthropy, or charitable behavior. Therefore, there is no basis for this recommendation. Trap type: Proxy-variable trap.

Option C recommends making detailed inquiries about how candidates were perceived by employees in previous leadership roles. This directly matches the study. The research focuses on employees' perceptions of leaders' fairness and self-sacrifice, and these perceptions are what influence elevation and the resulting employee outcomes. Therefore, this recommendation is strongly supported. Answer: Correct.

Option D recommends interviewing only candidates who led firms with rising profitability and share prices. Company financial performance was never examined in the study, so there is no evidence connecting these outcomes to fairness, self-sacrifice, elevation, or commitment. Trap type: Outcome-substitution trap.

Option E recommends reviewing organizational mission statements. Although mission statements may contain ethical language, the study never investigates mission statements or their connection to employee perceptions. Trap type: Indirect-evidence trap.

Final Answer: C.

A fast elimination strategy is to ask whether the option relies on a variable actually studied. Salary, volunteerism, profitability, and mission statements were never examined. Employee perceptions of leaders were examined directly. Therefore, only Option C survives.

The key skill tested is restricting recommendations to variables actually measured in the research rather than introducing plausible but unsupported outside factors.

Question 2

Statement 1: "The interaction of elevation among employees with their level of fairness toward other people they work with." This might seem correct because the study discusses both fairness and elevation. However, the fairness variable studied is the leader's fairness, not the employees' fairness toward coworkers. The information provided never examines employees' own fairness levels or their interaction with elevation. Therefore, the statement is not explicitly addressed.  Answer: No. Trap type: Wrong-variable trap.

Statement 2: "The extent to which elements of employees' contribution to a constructive working environment is statistically related to elevation." This is explicitly addressed. The study defines such contributions through altruism, courtesy, and compliance, and Figure 1 provides direct correlations between elevation and each of these outcomes (0.49, 0.41, and 0.38 respectively). Since these are statistical relationships, the information directly addresses the statement.  Answer: Yes.

Statement 3: "The intensity and duration of the emotional response inspired by the ethically commendable practices of leaders." Although elevation is measured, the study provides no information about how long the emotion lasts or how its intensity changes over time. Duration and persistence are never measured. Therefore, the information does not explicitly address this statement.  Answer: No. Trap type: Scope-extension trap .

Final Answer: No, Yes, No.

The key skill tested is distinguishing between information that is explicitly provided and information that merely seems related.

---

Question 3

Statement 1: "Self-sacrificial leadership can cause elevation, but only when the fairness exhibited by the leader is high." This appears plausible because Figure 2 shows the highest elevation when both fairness and self-sacrifice are high. However, the word "only" makes the statement too strong. Even when fairness is low, higher self-sacrifice is associated with higher elevation than lower self-sacrifice. Therefore, the effect is not restricted to situations of high fairness. Answer: No. Trap type: Extreme-language trap.

Statement 2: "Self-sacrificial leadership has the greatest effect on elevation when the fairness exhibited by a leader is high." Figure 2 directly supports this. When fairness is high, the gap in elevation between high-self-sacrifice and low-self-sacrifice leaders is much larger than when fairness is low. This indicates that the impact of self-sacrifice is strongest when fairness is also high. Answer: Yes.

Statement 3: "The process by which a leader's fairness affects employees' organizational commitment involves the employees experiencing elevation." Figure 1 shows a relationship from fairness to elevation and from elevation to commitment. In addition, the passage explicitly states that these effects are mediated by elevation. Therefore, elevation is part of the mechanism through which fairness influences commitment. Answer: Yes.

Final Answer: No, Yes, Yes.

The key skill tested is understanding interaction effects and mediation relationships while being careful with extreme words such as "only."

Rickooreo · Answer

For S2 - is it that in option 2 there is no direction being talked about - had it said employee affecting elevantion rather than saying they are correlated then it would have been false since passage is talking about leadership causes elevantion causes employee ?

and for this reason itself S1 is No?

and for this reason itself S1 is No?

Bunuel · Answer

For question 2: Statement 2 is  Yes  because correlation is enough. But Statement 1 is  No  for a different reason: it talks about employees’ fairness toward coworkers, while the study measures the leader’s fairness.

HarshKasliwal · Answer

i have just one doubt in question 2 : tab 1 says :  Employees who recall morally elevating events are more likely to focus their thoughts and motivations on other employees and to desire to enhance relationships and make moral improvements. 
and option says elevation is related to fairness in others. Now according to tab 1 employee who are elevated feel to make moral improvements ( which includes becoming more fair ) with other employees and hence this should be true.

alamin8 · Answer

So, you are saying option 1 from Q2 is Yes?

If so, the provided information does not talk about whether the employees fairness is related to their coworkers. That's the reason, it was a NO. I made the same mistake and when I read through the OA, I found that specific mistake.

egmat · Answer

Hi HarshKasliwal,

I can see exactly where this is coming from: you're anchoring on the line in  Tab 1  that says elevated employees "desire to enhance relationships and make moral improvements," and reading "moral improvements" as "become more fair to coworkers."

Two things quietly break that link, and both matter for a Yes/No question.

1. "Make moral improvements" is not the same as "fairness toward coworkers."  The passage never says elevation makes employees  more fair to the people they work with . "Moral improvements" is a broad, vague phrase - it could mean many things. To reach your reading, you have to  add  an assumption (moral improvement = increased fairness). The moment you supply a link the source doesn't state, it's no longer  explicitly  addressed - and that's the exact bar Statement  1  must clear.

2. The fairness the study actually measures is the  leader's  fairness, not the employees'.  Look at  Figure 1 : the fairness arrows all run from  leader's fairness  ( 0.29 ) into elevation. Nowhere do the sources measure employees' own fairness toward one another. This is the point Bunuel made in the thread - Statement  1  swaps in the  wrong  fairness variable.

So Statement  1  asks whether the material addresses an  interaction between elevation and employees' fairness toward coworkers  - a relationship the sources never set up, never measure, and only reach through an inference you'd have to build yourself. That's a  No .

Here's the test to lock in: for these Yes/No stems, ask  "Is this literally stated or charted somewhere across the tabs?"  - not  "Could this plausibly follow?"  If you need to add even one connecting step of your own, the answer is  No .

Answer: No, Yes, No

	Avoid setting the salary level so high that you will attract candidates who are mainly focused on financial gain for themselves.
	Do not interview candidates whose professional and personal history includes no evidence of volunteerism or major acts of philanthropy.
	Using the candidates' references, make detailed inquiries about how your preferred candidates, when in previous leadership roles, were perceived by employees.
	Interview only candidates who have led companies that have shown increasing profitability and improving share price performance over the years.
	Check the mission statements of the organizations, if any, that each candidate led, in order to identify the candidate.

A study has shown that when leaders practice interpersonal fairness an

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

Yes	No
		The interaction of elevation among employees with their level of fairness toward other people they work with
		The extent to which elements of employees’ contribution to a constructive working environment is statistically related to elevation
		The intensity and duration of the emotional response inspired by the ethically commendable practices of leaders

Yes	No
		Self-sacrificial leadership can cause elevation, but only when the fairness exhibited by the leader is high.
		Self-sacrificial leadership has the greatest effect on elevation when the fairness exhibited by a leader is high.
		The process by which a leader’s fairness affects employees’ organizational commitment involves the employees experiencing elevation.

GMAT Multi-Source Reasoning (MSR) Questions

A study has shown that when leaders practice interpersonal fairness an

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia