Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from Scientific Reports
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
The Polish version of the Ethical
Climate Questionnaire
Marcin Wnuk 1, Agnieszka Czerw 2, Marta Żywiołek-Szeja 3 &
Agata Chudzicka-Czupała 3
Ethical organizational climate is a pivotal topic in business ethics, inuencing employees’ well-being
and attitude toward the organization. In Poland, there is a lack of measures dedicated to verifying
organizational climate. Our research aimed to examine the psychometrical properties of the Ethical
Climate Questionnaire (ECQ) in Polish business conditions. Studies conducted on two samples
conrmed the original structure of the Polish version of the ECQ and its better psychometric properties
compared to the original version. Conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) conrmed good construct validity
and internal consistency of the ECQ, with Cronbach’s alpha coecients in the range of 0.74–0.81,
depending on the type of ethical climate. Bagozzi and Heatherton’s criteria of the magnitude of factor
loadings, average variance extracted, and composite reliability showed good convergent validity of the
tool. The value of the heterotrait–monotrait ratio of correlations indicated good discriminant validity
of the ECQ. Also, the criterion validity of this measure was conrmed. In conclusion, the Polish version
of the ECQ is a measure that can be used to study the ethical climate in Polish organizations.
Keywords e Ethical Climate Questionnaire, Measure, Conrmatory factor analysis, Convergent validity,
Discriminant validity
e issue of ethical business, including the ethical activities of organizations as institutions, as well as
employees’ ethical behavior, has long been present in work and organizational psychology1. is perspective
addresses specic actions or behaviors. However, the perspective of employees’ subjective assessment of the
ethicality of their organization seems to be underappreciated and much less explored, especially in the Polish
context. Employees’ subjective feelings about the way the organization functions are usually operationalized as
organizational climate. A search in the Ebsco database regarding research on ethical organizational climate in
the Polish context returned only seven articles on this topic, published in 2013–2023. It is worth noting that
the authors usually resorted to translated versions of the questionnaires2,3. To our best knowledge, there is no
psychometrically veried Polish version of the method for diagnosing ethical climate. At a time of increasing
interest in creating positive organizations and looking for eective ways to take care of employee well-being, it is
surprising that there is so little interest in the ethical climate in Polish science and organizational practice. One
of the reasons for this situation may be precisely the lack of a well-validated questionnaire. Consequently, the
study presenting the psychometric properties of the Polish version of the Ethical Climate Questionnaire4 is a
signicant contribution to conducting reliable research in a Polish and in an intercultural context. e tool has
gained a prominent place in empirical research on business ethics. Meta-analyses show that the ethical climate
that the tool measures is linked to important organizational outcomes5. Although some authors6,7 discuss its
certain features and consider the practical applicability of the questionnaire to be limited, its advantages and the
fact that it is commonly used in many studies make it worth adapting to the Polish conditions.
Organizational climate, or work climate, in its broadest denition, means employees’ shared perceptions of
psychologically important characteristics of procedures and processes, both formal and informal, implemented
in the organization4,8. Ethical climate is dened as the perception of what constitutes appropriate behavior in
a work situation, and thus becomes the psychological mechanism by which ethical issues are managed in the
organization5,8. Ethical climate theory was developed by Victor and Cullen4. e authors took into account
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development and Schneider’s work on sociocultural theories of organization8. ree
ethical categories are taken from Kohlberg’s theory: egoism (maximizing one’s benets, and self-interest),
benevolence (maximizing the interests of as many people as possible), and principles (adhering to universal
standards and beliefs). ese ethical categories are associated with three reference groups that constitute
1Faculty of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan, Wieniawskiego 1, 61-712
Poznan, Poland. 2Faculty of Psychology and Law in Poznań, Interdisciplinary Center for Social Activity & Well-Being
Research FEEL & ACT WELL, SWPS University, Poznan, Poland. 3Faculty of Psychology in Katowice, Interdisciplinary
Center for Social Activity & Well-Being Research FEEL & ACT WELL, SWPS University, Katowice, Poland. email:
mzywiolek-szeja@st.swps.edu.pl
OPEN
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 1
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
the sources of moral reasoning, i.e. what is considered ethically appropriate, namely: individual (based on
the employee’s self-dened ethical beliefs); local (based on the organization’s standards and principles); and
cosmopolitan (external to the individual and the organization, for instance coming from a professional
association). e combination of three ethical standards with three references creates nine theoretical dimensions
of the ethical work climate4,9. However, empirical research does not conrm the existence of these nine climate
types. Both the questionnaire created by the authors of the ECQ4 and other analyses8 usually indicate ve types
of ethical climate: instrumental, caring, independence, law and code, and rules.
e instrumental climate is characterized by an emphasis on maximizing self-interest at the individual
or organizational level. Employees perceive decisions in the organization as being made from the egoistic
perspective of the manager pursuing their own or the organization’s interests. is also happens despite the
negative consequences for individual employees or employee groups. e main operating principle is the good of
the organization as a formal institution. e caring climate emphasizes the well-being of others. Employees feel
that the organization’s decisions and actions take into account their interests, not just those of the organization
as such. e belief is that taking care of employees serves the organization as a community. e main rule in the
organization is kindness towards all employees. e independence climate focuses on valuing individual ethical
beliefs. e organization ensures that each employee can make ethical decisions based on their principles. e
inuence of external rules is minimized. e organization leaves employees free to assume ethical responsibility
for their conduct. e basic principle is trust in the employees’ moral and ethical correctness. e law and
code climate emphasizes compliance with general legal regulations and professional standards. e organization
operates on the basis of the law in force in a given country, region, etc., and on the existing standards
of functioning in a given profession, if any. Employees see their organization as paying special attention to
compliance with external legal rules. e main principle of the organization’s operation is compliance with the
law. e rules climate is characterized by an emphasis on local rules and procedures. e organization ensures
that all employees know and precisely apply the rules set forth in the internal regulations, such as statutes, codes,
and various bylaws. e main principle of operation in the organization is the superiority of organizational
rules over other rules of conduct. It is worth noting that the ve types of ethical climate are not always treated
separately. In some studies and analyses, they are ranked from the least to the most ethical10 considering the
types of ethical criteria and levels of analysis. In this case, the order will go from a cosmopolitan climate (law and
code) to a climate of individual interests (instrumental). is approach enables analyses taking into account the
ethical climate as a mediator between other variables. However, most analyses are based on separate treatments
of climate types.
Many studies show that these ve types of climate are dierentially associated with both positive and negative
consequences. e research mainly concerns employee consequences understood as attitudes towards work
and organization, but also as specic behaviors. Newman and colleagues11 point to four groups: work attitudes
(e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment), ethical outcomes (e.g., ethical intentions, ethical behavior),
psychological states (e.g. moral distress, mindfulness), and performance outcomes (e.g. job performance,
teamwork). A review of the research on ethical climate correlates makes it possible to indicate that positive
outcomes are especially related to caring climate: job satisfaction5,8,11–13, organizational commitment5,8,11,12,14,15,
and organizational citizenship behavior10–12. Another clear conclusion from the research review is the positive
correlation of instrumental climate (sometimes referred to as egoistic) with negative outcomes such as workplace
deviant behavior9, bullying behavior16, turnover intention5,11,17, job burnout, and in particular emotional
exhaustion17. Most oen, research shows that a caring climate has the opposite eects to an instrumental climate.
e conclusions from correlation analyses of other climate types are slightly less obvious. Typically, however,
the two types of climate related to compliance with general legal or organizational provisions and principles
(respectively: law and code, and rules) have predominantly positive consequences5,11,18.
e study aims to analyze the psychometric properties of the Ethical Climate Questionnaire4 in the Polish
context. Based on the above-mentioned conclusions from other studies, we assume that the instrumental climate
will negatively correlate with the well-being indicators used in this study, and positively with stress. However,
the caring climate will show opposite relationships. Another important goal is to ll the gap in investigating this
area in the realities of Polish organizations, which will be possible thanks to the adaptation of the questionnaire.
Method and results
Our study was a methodological cross-sectional survey. It was conducted on two samples of full-time employees
working in dierent companies in Poland. e dierent stages of the analysis were aimed at translating the
tool and determining its internal validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and reliability in the Polish
employee population.
We used the back-translation method to prepare the Polish version of the measure19. In the rst stage, three
specialists, translators who were also psychologists and academic teachers, made their translations from English
to Polish. Next, three other translators made their back-translations. Aer comparing the texts obtained, the
nal version was dened.
e present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of SWPS University, Katowice, Poland (Ethics code:
WKEB89/11/2023). All ethical principles, including obtaining necessary permission from the main designers
of the measure, obtaining written informed consent from all participants, ensuring the condentiality of their
information, and freedom to withdraw from the study, were observed at every step.
Study 1: internal validity, reliability, and discriminant validity of the ECQ
Participants
e research encompassed 434 full-time employees with employment contracts in dierent companies in
Poland. Every participant expressed written consent to participate in the study. e sample was balanced on
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 2
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
the grounds of sex and education. It included 252 women (58.6%) and 178 men (41.4%). e mean age of the
participants was M = 29.58years (SD = 10.79), with mean seniority of M = 8.66years (SD = 9.5). Four (0.9%)
of them had elementary education, and seven participants (1.6%) had vocational education. A total of 180
participants (41.9%) had completed secondary, and 239 (55.6%) higher education. In terms of the position
held, 260 participants (43.5%) were ordinary workers, 319 employees (34.2%) were independent specialists,
57 participants (7%) were low-level managers, 86 respondents (11.9%) were mid-level managers, and 32
respondents (3.5%) were senior-level managers.
Internal validity and reliability of the ECQ
Conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used as an appropriate method to verify whether the original ve-factor
structure of the ECQ4 would be reected in data from a Polish employee population.
Results showed that the ve-factor model of the ECQ is poorly tted: CMIN/DF 2.84 (p = 0.000), RMSEA
[0.065. 90% (0.060; 0.071)], SRMR = 0.0784, CFI = 0.88, TLI = 0.85, NFI = 0.88, GFI = 0.88. Additionally, six items
of the ECQ, three as caring ethical organization climate indicators and three as instrumental ethical organization
climate indicators loaded these factors below the threshold level of 0.4 (see Table 1) established as a minimum20,21.
Aer deleting these items from further analysis, CFA revealed that the ve-factor solution was well tted to the
data (see Table 2), and every item loaded higher than 0.420,21, with Cronbach’s alpha coecient as a reliability
indicator being above the acceptable level of 0.722 for every ECQ dimension (see Table 1). It indicated that the
ve-factor original version of the ECQ, consisting of 20 items, has satisfactory internal validity and reliability.
e ve types of organizational climate explained 63.34% of the variance of this construct, respectively: law
and code ethical organizational climate—28.17%, caring ethical organizational climate—14.87%, independence
ethical organizational climate—8.83%, rules ethical organizational climate—6.36% and instrumental ethical
organizational climate—5.09%.
Additionally, the tness of alternative models with one, two, three, and four factors was tested. Only the
model with four factors had a good adjustment to the data, but in comparison with the ve-dimensional model,
its tness was statistically signicantly worse (see Table 2).
Discriminant validity
Discriminant validity was examined by using the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) method
with a threshold value of 0.923 and correlations between factors encompassing the ethical organizational climate
construct, whose values should be less than 0.824.
As presented in Table 3, the HTMT ratio did not exceed 0.9 for any of the pairs of ethical organizational
climate types. Also, correlations between them were lower than 0.8. Caring climate correlated positively with law
and code climate (r = 0.25; p < 0.01), rules climate (r = 0.36; p < 0.01), and independence climate (r = 0.53; p < 0.01),
and negatively with instrumental climate (r = − 0.48; p < 0.01). Law and code climate was positively related to
rules climate (r = 0.72; p < 0.01) and independence climate (r = 0.2; p < 0.01), and negatively to instrumental
climate (r = − 0.16; p < 0.01). Rules climate correlated positively with independence climate (r = 0.11; p < 0.05) and
negatively with instrumental climate (r = − 0.32; p < 0.01), which in turn was negatively related to independence
climate (r = − 0.24; p < 0.01).
Study 2: internal and convergent validity of the ECQ
Participants
e study participants were 1,071 employees from dierent organizations located in Poland. All of them gave
written consent to participate in the study. Most of them were women (860; 80.3%), 200 were men (18.7%),
and 11 declared another gender (1%). e mean age of the participants was M = 28.64years (SD = 8.74), with
mean seniority of M = 7.88 years (SD = 7.04). Two (0.2%) of the participants had elementary education, four
(0.4%) had vocational education, 539 (50.3%) had secondary education, and 526 (49.1%) had higher education.
A total of 432 (40.3%) were ordinary workers, 412 (38.5%) were independent specialists, 50 (4.7%) were low-
level managers, 106 (9.9%) were mid-level managers, and 71 (6.6%) were senior-level managers. A total of
278 participants (26%) were employed in micro-organizations, 254 (23.7%) in small companies, 152 (14.2) in
medium-sized companies, and 387 (36.1%) in large companies.
Internal validity
CFA was conducted on a 20-item version of the ECQ for ve variants of the model, respectively for one-factor,
two-factor, three-factor, four-factor, and ve-factor solutions. e results presented in Table 4 show that only
the ve-factor model following the original structure of this measure has a good t to the data. e ve-
factor solution explained 70.98% of the variance of ethical organizational climate, respectively: law and code
ethical climate—31.75%, independence climate—17.23%, caring climate—10.88%, rules climate—6.56%, and
instrumental climate—4.5%.
Just like in Study 1, every item loaded the factor higher than the established standard of 0.420,21, and only one
item loaded the factor lower than 0.6 (see Table 5).
Besides Bagozzi & Heatherton’s25 criterion of convergent validity regarding the magnitude of most factor
loadings (threshold 0.50), which was fullled, two other conditions for convergent validity suggested by these
authors were met, such as composite reliability (qC) (threshold 0.60–0.70) and average variance extracted
(threshold 0.50), but with one exception, that of instrumental ethical organizational climate (see Table 5).
Composite reliability, also known as construct reliability, was higher than the acceptable standard26 for
all dimensions of the Polish version of the ECQ (see Table 3). In contrast to Cronbach’s alpha coecient, the
composite reliability coecient is free from measurement error. e dierences in outcomes between these
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 3
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Number of model Factors CMIN/DF RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI NFI GFI
Five factor model CR, LAC, R, INST, I 1.2 (p = 0.064) [0.022. 90% (0.000; 0.033)] 0.043 0.99 0.96 0.99 0.97
Four factor model CR, LAC + R, INST, I 1.93 (p = 0.000) [0.046. 90% (0.038; 0.055)] 0.053 0.96 0.93 0.95 0.95
ree factor model CR + LAC + R. INST, I 6.34 (p = 0.000) [0.111. 90% (0.104; 0.111)] 0.110 0.79 0.69 0.76 0.81
Two factor model CR + LAC + R + INST, I 7.74 (p = 0.000) [0.125. 90% (0.118; 0.132)] 0.113 0.74 0.62 0.71 0.78
One factor model CR + LAC + R + INST + I 9.43 (p = 0.000) [0.139. 90% (0.132; 0.147)] 0.123 0.67 0.52 0.65 0.74
Tab le 2. Results of t indices indicators of dierent models of ECQ (n = 434). Caring = CR; Law and
code = LAC; Rules = R; Instrumental = INST; Independence = I.
Items English version Items Polish version Factor
Estimate
original
version
Estimate
revised
version Cronbach’s
alpha
What is best for everyone in the company is the major
consideration here To, co jest najlepsze dla wszystkich w rmie, jest tutaj
najważniejszą kwestią
Caring
.804 .805
.79
e most important concern is the good of all the people in
the company as a whole Przedmiotem najwyższej troski jest dobro wszystkich ludzi w
rmie jako całości .836 .846
Our major concern is always what is best for the other
person Naszą główną troską jest zawsze to, co jest najlepsze dla
drugiej osoby .736 .735
In this company, people look out for each other’s good W tej rmie ludzie czynią sobie wzajemnie dobro .523 .518
In this company, it is expected that you will always do what
is right for the customers and public W tej rmie zawsze oczekuje się zrobienia tego, co jest
właściwe dla klientów i opinii publicznej − .004
e most ecient way is always the right way in this
company Najbardziej efektywny sposób jest zawsze właściwy w tej
rmie .164
In this company, each person is expected above all to work
eciently W tej rmie oczekuje się przede wszystkim efektywnej pracy
od każdej osoby − .014
People are expected to comply with the law and professional
standards over and above other considerations Od ludzi oczekuje się tu przede wszystkim przestrzegania
prawa i standardów zawodowych
Law and code
.613 .623
.77
In this company, the law or ethical code of their profession
is the major consideration W tej rmie głównym przedmiotem rozważań jest prawo lub
kodeks etyczny ich zawodu .568 .577
In this company, people are expected to strictly follow legal
or professional standards W tej rmie oczekuje się od ludzi ścisłego przestrzegania
norm prawnych i standardów zawodowych .798 .799
In this company, the rst consideration is whether a
decision violates any law W tej rmie najważniejszą kwestią do rozważenia jest to, czy
decyzja narusza jakiekolwiek prawo .652 .645
It is very important to follow the company’s rules and
procedures here Przestrzeganie zasad i procedur obowiązujących w rmie jest
bardzo ważne
Rules
.682 .830
.81
Everyone is expected to stick by company rules and
procedures Od każdego oczekuje się przestrzegania zasad i procedur
rmy .793 .792
Successful people in this company go by the book Ludzie sukcesu w tej rmie stosują się do obowiązujących
zasad .637 .512
People in this company strictly obey the company policies Osoby w tej rmie ściśle przestrzegają obowiązujących zasad .872 .836
In this company, people protect their own interests above
all else W tej rmie ludzie nade wszystko chronią swoje własne
interesy
Instrumental
.730 .714
.74
In this company, people are mostly out for themselves W tej rmie ludzie działają głównie dla siebie .810 .848
ere is no room for one’s own personal morals or ethics in
this company W tej rmie nie ma miejsca na własną moralność czy etykę .549 530
People are expected to do anything to further the company’s
interests regardless of the consequences Oczekuje się, że ludzie zrobią tu wszystko, aby wspierać
interesy rmy, bez względu na konsekwencje .443 .409
People here are concerned with the company’s interests—to
the exclusion of all else Ludzie troszczą się o interesy rmy—wykluczając tym samym
wszystkie inne sprawy .207
Work is considered substandard only when it hurts the
company’s interests Praca jest uważana za niespełniającą norm tylko wtedy, gdy
szkodzi interesom rmy .364
e major responsibility of people in this company is to
control costs Głównym obowiązkiem ludzi w tej rmie jest kontrola
kosztów .396
In this company, people are expected to follow their own
personal and moral beliefs W tej rmie oczekuje się, że ludzie będą postępować zgodnie
z własnymi przekonaniami osobistymi i moralnymi
Independence
.744 .740
.77
Each person in this company decides for themselves what is
right and wrong Każda osoba w tej rmie sama decyduje, co jest dobre, a co
złe .471 .470
e most important concern in this company is each
person’s own sense of right and wrong Przedmiotem najwyższej troski w tej rmie jest własne
poczucie dobra i zła każdej osoby .774 .772
In this company, people are guided by their own personal
ethics W tej rmie ludzie kierują się swoją osobistą etyką .597 .578
Tab le 1. CFA and Cronbach’s alpha results of the ECQ (n = 434).
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 4
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
methods were not large and both of them conrmed that the Polish version of the ECQ has satisfactory reliability
(see Table 5).
Indicator variables Latent variables Standardized loadings Square of
standardized loadings Sum of square of
standardized loadings Average variances
extracted (AVE) Square of (AVE) Composite
reliability
1
Caring
.795 63.20
216.93 54.23 0.74 .87
2 .736 54.17
3 .657 43.16
4 .751 56.40
5
Law and code
.450 20.25
235.19 58.79 .77 .86
6 .844 71.23
7 .881 77.61
8 .813 66.10
9
Rules
.618 38.19
203.07 50.92 .71 .86
10 .642 63.68
11 .842 42.22
12 .798 58.98
13
Instrumental
.645 41.60
182.2 45.55 .67 .79
14 .718 51.55
15 .677 45.83
16 .662 43.82
17
Independence
.691 47.74
213.82 53.45 .73 .86
18 .841 70.72
19 .698 48.72
20 .683 46.64
Tab le 5. Results of methods used to verify convergent and divergent validities and composite reliability
(n = 1071).
Number of model Factors CMIN/DF RMSEA SRMR CFI TLI NFI GFI
Five factor model CR, LAC, R, INST, I 3.3 (p = 0.000) [0.047. 90% (0.040; 0.053)] 0.035 0.99 0.97 0.98 0.98
Four factor model CR, LAC + R, INST, I 10.59 (p = 0.000) [0.095. 90% (0.089; 0.0101)] 0.057 0.95 0.87 0.94 0.93
ree factor model CR + LAC + R. INST, I 18.93 (p = 0.000) [0.130. 90% (0.124; 0.136)] 0.116 0.9 0.76 0.9 0.81
Two factor model CR + LAC + R + INST, I 27.97 (p = 0.000) [0.160. 90% (0.154; 0.165)] 0.142 0.85 0.64 0.85 0.76
One factor model CR + LAC + R + INST + I 38.83 (p = 0.000) [0.189. 90% (0.183; 0.195)] 0.156 0.79 0.49 0.79 0.76
Tab le 4. Results of t indices indicators of dierent models of ECQ (n = 1071). Caring = CR; Law and
code = LAC; Rules = R; Instrumental = INST; Independence = I.
Types of organizational ethical climate Monotrait
Heterotrait HTMT ratio
Pair of variables Pair of variables
CR .531 CR–LAC .131 CR–LAC .264
LAC .461 CR–R .228 CR–R .850
R .506 CR–INST .248 CR–INST .528
INST .417 CR–I .255 CR–I .529
I .437 LAC–R .359 LAC–R .743
LAC–INST .045 LAC–INST .103
LAC–I .066 LAC–I .147
R–INST .159 R–INST .347
R–I .063 R–I .134
INST–I .117 INST–I .275
Tab le 3. Results of heterotrait–monotrait ratio of correlations (n = 434). Caring = CR; Law and code = LAC;
Rules = R; Instrumental = INST; Independence = I.
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 5
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Although the average variance extracted for the instrumental climate was close to, but below the threshold
level, the composite reliability for this dimension was higher than the acceptable standard 0.7, which means that
following Fornell and Larcker27, it can be admitted that the condition for convergent validity was met.
Divergent validity
e HTMT ratio was applied to test divergent validity. As presented in Table 6, for every pair of ECQ dimensions,
the HTMT value is below the established standard, which means that this measure characterizes satisfactory
divergent validity. is conclusion is supported by the values of the correlation coecients between the ECQ
factors, which did not exceed 0.8.
Criterion-related validity
Four measures of criterion validity were used: perceived stress at work, job satisfaction, turnover intention, and
meaning in work.
e Polish version of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10) was used to diagnose the feeling of stress at work.
e Polish adaptation28 is based on the scale invented by Cohen and colleagues29. It is a one-dimensional scale
consisting of 10 items. Respondents answer on a ve-point frequency scale: from 1—never, to 5—very oen.
ey refer to their feelings at work from the past month. Cronbach’s α coecient in this study was 0.75.
Job satisfaction was measured using one statement: “How generally are you satised with work”. Participants
responded by choosing on a ten-point scale between (1) very dissatised to very satised (10).
e turnover intention was examined using a three-item measure30. e item contents were as follows: “I
intend to leave the organization”, “ I intend to make a genuine eort to nd another job over the next few months”,
and “I oen think about quitting”. Participants responded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly
disagree to 5 = strongly agree. is measure has good psychometric properties. In this study, the reliability of the
scale, assessed by Cronbach’s α coecient, was 0.82.
e Work and Meaning Inventory in the Polish version, i.e. WAMI-PL31 was used to assess the sense of
meaning in work. e questionnaire was inspired by Steger’s WAMI32. e Polish version consists of two
dimensions: Meaning of work in the self-perspective (six items) and Meaning of work in the world perspective
(four items). In this study, we used only items regarding the meaning of work in the self-perspective. e
reliability of the measure, assessed by Cronbach’s α coecient, was 0.89.
Criterion validity was examined through the correlation between types of ethical organizational climate and
well-being and ill-being measures. e results of correlation coecient values are shown in Table 7.
e caring, law and code, and rules ethical climates were negatively related to stress, turnover intentions,
and education as well as positively related to meaning in work. e independence ethical climate was negatively
related to stress, turnover intentions, and organizational size as well as negatively related to meaning in work, and
the position held. e instrumental ethical climate correlated positively with stress and turnover intentions and
negatively with job satisfaction, meaning in work, education, and the level of the position held. Additionally, the
level of the position held was positively related to the caring and rules ethical climates, whereas organizational
size correlated negatively with the caring ethical climate and negatively with the law and code and rules climates.
Analyses with a demographic variable: gender
Additionally, gender dierences were examined. According to the obtained results, women and men dier in
the level of independence ethical climate t(1,058) = 2.29, p < 0.05; p < 0.01; Men M = 10.57, SD = 3.75, Women
M = 11.23; SD = 3.6) but in terms of the law and caring, law and code, rules, and instrumental climates, no
dierence was detected, with respectively t(1,058) = 1.69, p = 0.09; Men M = 11.88, SD = 3.83, Women M = 12.38;
SD = 3.78), t(1,058) = − 0.05, p = 0.47; Men M = 13.33, SD = 4.01, Women M = 13.31; SD = 3.76), t(1,058) = 0.22,
p = 0.41; Men M = 14.25, SD = 3.63, Women M = 14.31; SD = 3.64), and t(1,058) = − 1.24, p = 0.11; Men M = 11.43,
SD = 3.47, Women M = 11.08; SD = 3.6). Women presented a higher level of independence climate than men.
Types of organizational ethical climate Monotrait
Heterotrait HTMT Ratio
Pair of variables Pair of variables
CR .534 CR–LAC .133 CR–LAC .269
LAC .453 CR–R .224 CR–R .824
R .509 CR–INST .22 CR–INST .460
INST .428 CR–I .269 CR–I .553
I .443 LAC–R .368 LAC–R .766
LAC–INST .045 LAC–INST .102
LAC–I .082 LAC–I .183
R–INST .135 R–INST .289
R–I .090 R–I .190
INST–I .103 INST–I .238
Tab le 6. Results of heterotrait–monotrait ratio of correlations (n = 1071). Caring = CR; Law and code = LAC;
Rules = R; Instrumental = INST; Independence = I.
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 6
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
Discussion
Our study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the ECQ4 in a sample of Polish employees as a
potentially reliable and valid measure to use in the research of the organizational ethical climate in Polish
socioeconomic and business conditions. As previous studies conrmed, the ethical climate is a pivotal topic for
social good dened from the perspectives of benets of employees and companies5,8,11. Recent studies in several
countries have supported the assumption that ethical climate perception is a good predictor of dierent well-
being indicators and desirable attitudes in the workplace, such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
turnover intentions, and ethical and dysfunctional behavior5,8,11,33–36. However, such research is lacking in
Poland. With the Polish version of the questionnaire, it will be possible to check whether the above-mentioned
relationships are also conrmed in the Polish reality. We are aware that the study presented here is only a trigger
for larger-scale research. For example, a study of dierent industries, and organizations varying in size or type
of ownership, will provide further insight into whether such relationships are universal or specic to certain
environments. Knowledge of this will allow for a better understanding of how to improve employee well-being
and stimulate behavior useful to the organization. is can subsequently be translated into practical actions
implemented in organiz ations.
As suggested by ndings from studies conducted in other countries, in this study, we used certain correlates
of ethical climate as validity criteria (e.g., job satisfaction, turnover intentions, stress at work), but we also added
the sense of meaning in work. is is an important indicator of well-being that has not previously been used
in ethical climate research. Like in earlier studies, the same tendency is revealed, namely that the instrumental
climate was negatively connected with benecial outcomes, such as meaning in work, and positively with
detrimental and undesirable outcomes, such as stress and turnover intentions. Employees who assess the
organizational climate as instrumental are more motivated to quit their jobs35,36, are more stressed, and have a
problem with nding meaning in work.
In turn, in the same vein as in previous studies, the remaining ethical climate types were positively related to
protable consequences and negatively correlated with harmful ones. is means that the caring, rules, law and
codes, as well as independence ethical climates, play similar positive roles in employees’ well-being and their
attitude toward their companies, facilitating nding meaning in work and protecting from stress and turnover
intentions35,36.
Only one discrepancy with recent research was found. e caring and instrumental ethical climates were
both irrelevant to job satisfaction13,33,35–37. One of the reasons for this could be the specicity of the measure
used to examine job satisfaction, which was one general question.
According to the study ndings, the perception of the ethical organizational climate among Polish employees
is independent of seniority but partially depends on age, gender, education, and level of position held. Older
employees have a lower tendency to perceive caring and instrumental climates, but the perception of other
types of ethical climates is unrelated to age. Women scored higher in the independence ethical climate, which
means that they are more prone to see the organizational climate through the prism of their values, norms, and
codes of conduct. On the other hand, the independence climate was the only type of ethical climate unrelated
to education, but the remaining climate types were negatively correlated with education. is implies that
more educated individuals perceive the ethical rules contained in organizational procedure and politics from
a more individual and autonomous point of view, and follow organizational cues and suggestions less oen.
A higher position in the organization goes hand in hand with the positive perception of the caring, rules, and
independence climates, and a negative perception of the instrumental climate, but is irrelevant to the law and
code climate.
Caring Law and code Rules Instrumental Independence
Caring
Law and code 0.35**
Rules 0.38** 0.70**
Instrumental − 0.35** − 0.06 − 0.15**
Independence 0.48** 0.16** 0.14** − 0.20**
Stress at work − 0.32** − 0.11** − 0.14** 0.38** − 0.14**
Job satisfaction − 0.04 0.08** 0.04 0.07* − 0.06
Turnover intentions − 0.48** − 0.21** − 0.25** 0.39** − 0.33**
Meaning in work 0.43** 0.23** 0.22** − 0.22** 0.32**
Age − 0.07* 0.03 0.01 − 0.10** − 0.04
Education − 0.10** − 0.06* − 0.06* − 0.06* − 0.01
Overall seniority − 0.05 − 0.02 − 0.02 0.01 0.01
Seniority in current organization − 0.05 − 0.03 − 0.03 0.02 0.01
Level the position held 0.09** 0.05 0.07* − 0.06* 0.10*
Company size − 0.22** 0.07* 0.10** 0.16** − 0.23**
Tab le 7. Correlation coecient results between the ECQ and measures used for criterion validity (n = 1071).
*p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 7
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
One way to explain these results may be the role played by managers as organizational representatives
responsible for developing and distributing ethical rules, principles, and standards. What is essential is that
the bigger the company is, the stronger the perception of the law and code, rules, and instrumental climates,
and the weaker the caring and independence climates are perceived by employees. is shows two interesting
phenomena. e rst one is that individual moral standards, values, and rules have a less signicant position
and less meaning in large companies compared to the ones imposed by organizations. e need to conform
to them inuences employees’ values, as adhering to organizational norms and values can lead to a sense of
security and harmonious cooperation within the team. Sometimes employees become conformists, treating the
organization as the most important goal and subordinating their values to it. Secondly, we assume that in larger
companies, ethical climate perception may be determined by more self-centered and egoistic values and the
welfare of individuals, rather than by altruistic and prosocial values, focused on collective well-being. However,
these hypotheses require further research.
e Polish language version of the ECQ has satisfactory psychometric properties, even better than the
original one. e results of conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) made it possible to demonstrate good internal
validity of the modied version of the ECQ. Like in the original version, the ve-factor solution was supported as
having the best t to the data. e heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) method supported good
discriminant validity of the factors being part of the ECQ, showing that the ratio for all pairs of types of ethical
organizational climate did not exceed 0.923. Also, following Bagozzi & Heatherton’s25 criteria of convergent
validity, the magnitude of most factor loadings was more than 0.50, the composite reliability value was more
than 0.70, and the average variance extracted exceeded 0.50. One exception was the instrumental climate, but
the value obtained was slightly dierent from the required standard.
All subscales, in comparison to the original version, had a higher Cronbach’s alpha coecient conrming
the good reliability of this measure, and it was additionally supported by the composite reliability procedure.
In the case of two factors, namely the caring ethical climate and the instrumental ethical climate, it could be
a consequence of the limitation of items from seven to four on each of them, but this did not concern the
independence ethical climate, where the original item structure was retained. Despite this, in the Polish
conditions, the independence ethical climate dimension has good reliability compared to its original scale
counterpart. e original item structure of the ECQ was modied because three items, indicators of both the
caring climate and the instrumental climate, did not load these factors at least on the reference admissible level.
What is worth emphasizing is that the value of the correlation coecient between the law and code climate and
the rules climate was strong compared to the moderate one in the original version of the ECQ. Also, in a sample
of Taiwanese nurses, this relationship was only weak35,36, moderate among employees from Hong Kong10, and
not signicant in Danish companies38, which implies the sensitivity of this measure to cultural inuences33.
e above suggests that in Polish realities, policies, practices, and procedures, which have ethical connotations
and are the basis of decision-making, the rules climate is strongly inuenced by a cosmopolitan point of view,
taking into account the ethical values derived from external and universal ethical standards, such as the Bible or
the law 5,8. It seems reasonable because Poles are a very religiously involved nation39 and religion has an impact on
many areas of life. We believe that in Poland, religious socialization, which is focused on altruistic values, can be
a possible factor responsible for a more than twice stronger positive correlation between the independence and
caring climates compared to the original version4, whereas among Danish employees, it was non-signicant39,
just like in the case of Hong Kong companies10 and managers from Russia40. is means that the independence
climate is based on individual values and beliefs, and moral code among Polish employees is oen focused
on altruistic, non-self-centered attitudes as attributes characteristic of a caring climate. ese altruistic values
contradict the proposal of the instrumental climate, which, in opposition to them, emphasizes egoistic and
self-centered motives and concentrates on driving individual, non-collective well-being. e altruistic approach
as a probable result of religious socialization among Polish employees avoiding egoistic desires and treating
them as undesirable is also seen in the negative correlation between individuals’ perception of the caring and
instrumental climates, which was not found in the study by Victor and Cullen4 where those variables were
unrelated.
Some limitations of this study should be addressed. e research was not preceded by a pilot study. e
generalizability of the outcomes is limited because the research sample was not randomly selected. In both
research samples, the participants were relatively young. Additionally, in second sample, the vast majority were
women. A single-item measure was used to verify job satisfaction. Besides the advantages, this solution has some
methodological limitations, especially regarding potential problems with reliability41. Additionally, one general
question about job satisfaction does not encompass all aspects of satisfaction with work, such as satisfaction with
supervisors, workmates, atmosphere, promotion, or salary. Finally, the lack of division of the study samples into
two groups, which would allow for better coverage of discriminant validity, implies the need to conduct research
in a longitudinal design in the future.
In conclusion, keeping in mind the limitations of this study mentioned above, and that the Polish version of
the ECQ may not apply to all Polish organizations, we believe that the presented version of the questionnaire is
a valid and reliable measure and that it can be a useful tool for verifying manifestations of the ethical climate as
perceived by employees of several companies in Poland. Our study has shown that the results obtained in the
survey that used the questionnaire can be a good predictor of employees’ well-being and attitudes towards the
organization.
Data availability
e data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.
Received: 5 May 2024; Accepted: 11 March 2025
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 8
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
References
1. Leowitz, J. Values and Ethics of Industrial-Organizational Psychology (3rd ed.) https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003212577 (Routledge,
2023).
2. Simha, A. & Stachowicz-Stanusch, A. e link between ethical climates and managerial success: A study in a Polish context. J. Bus.
Ethics 114(1), 55–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1325-3 (2013).
3. Simha, A. & Stachowicz-Stanusch, A. e eects of ethical climates on trust in supervisor and trust in organization in a Polish
context. Manag. Decis. 53(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2013-0409 (2015).
4. Victor, B. & Cullen, J. B. e organizational bases of ethical work climates. Adm. Sci. Q. 33(1), 101–125. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 2 3 0 7 / 2
3 9 2 8 5 7 (1998).
5. Martin, K. D. & Cullen, J. B. Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A meta-analytic review. J. Bus. Ethics 69,
175–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9084-7 (2006).
6. Kuenzi, M., Mayer, D. M. & Greenbaum, R. L. Creating an ethical organizational environment: e relationship between ethical
leadership, ethical organizational climate, and unethical behavior. Pers. Psychol. 73(1), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12356
(2020).
7. Maesschalck, J. Making behavioral ethics research more useful for ethics management practice: Embracing complexity using a
design science approach. J. Bus. Ethics 181, 933–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04900-6 (2022).
8. Simha, A. & Cullen, J. B. Ethical climates and their eects on organizational outcomes: Implications from the past and prophecies
for the future. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 26(4), 20–34. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2011.0156 (2012).
9. Peterson, D. K. Deviant workplace behavior and the organization’s ethical climate. J. Bus. Psychol. 17, 47–61. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0
2 3 / A : 1 0 1 6 2 9 6 1 1 6 0 9 3 (2002).
10. Leung, A. S. M. Matching ethical work climate to in-role and extra-role behaviors in a collectivist work setting. J. Bus. Ethics
79(1–2), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9392-6 (2008).
11. Newman, A., Round, H., Bhattacharya, S. & Roy, A. Ethical climates in organizations: A review and research agenda. Bus. Ethics Q.
27, 475–512. https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2017.23 (2017).
12. Huang, C. C., You, C. S. & Tsai, M. T. A multidimensional analysis of ethical climate, job satisfaction, organizational commitment,
and organizational citizenship behaviors. Nurs. Ethics 19(4), 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733011433923 (2012).
13. Wang, Y. D. & Hsieh, H. H. Toward a better understanding of the link between ethical climate and job satisfaction: A multilevel
analysis. J. Bus. Ethics 105, 535–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0984-9 (2012).
14. Cullen, J. B., Parboteeah, K. P. & Victor, B. e eects of ethical climates on organizational commitment: A two-study analysis. J.
Bus. Ethics 46, 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025089819456 (2003).
15. Choe, K. L., Choong, Y. O. & Tan, L. P. e impact of ethical climate on organizational commitment: A study of Malaysian higher
learning institutions. GJBM 9(1s), 208 (2017).
16. Bulutlar, F. & Öz, E. Ü. e eects of ethical climates on bullying behaviour in the workplace. J. Bus. Ethics 86, 273–295. h t t p s : / / d o
i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1 0 5 5 1 - 0 0 8 - 9 8 4 7 - 4 (2009).
17. Yang, F. H., Tsai, Y. S. & Tsai, K. C. e inuences of ethical climate on turnover intention: the mediating role of emotional
exhaustion. Int. J. Organ. Innov. 6(4), 72 (2014).
18. Chen, C. C., Chen, M. Y. C. & Liu, Y. C. Negative aectivity and workplace deviance: e moderating role of ethical climate. Int. J.
Hum. Resour. Man. 24(15), 2894–2910. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2012.753550 (2013).
19. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F. & Ferraz, M. B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report
measures. Spine 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014 (2000).
20. Henson, R. K. & Roberts, J. K. Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research: Common errors and some comment on
improved practice. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 66(3), 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282485 (2006).
21. Stevens, J. P. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences (4th ed.) (Erlbaum, 2002).
22. L ance, C. E., Butts, M. M. & Michels, L. C. e sources of four commonly reported cuto criteria: What did they really say?. Organ.
Res. Methods 9(2), 202–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284919 (2006).
23. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation
modeling. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 (2015).
24. Rönkkö, M. & Cho, E. An updated guideline for assessing discriminant validity. Organ. Res. Methods 25(1), 6–14. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g /
1 0 . 1 1 7 7 / 1 0 9 4 4 2 8 1 2 0 9 6 8 6 1 4 (2022).
25. Bagozzi, R. P. & Heatherton, T. F. A general approach to representing multifaceted personality constructs: Application to state self-
esteem. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 1(1), 35–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519409539961 (1994).
26. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.) (Prentice-Hall, 2009).
27. Fornell, C. & Larcker, D. F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark.
Res. 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312 (1981).
28. Chirkowska-Smolak, T. & Grobelny J. Konstrukcja i wstępna analiza psychometryczna Kwestionariusza Postrzeganego Stresu w
Pracy (PSwP). Czasopismo Psychologiczne. 22(1), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.14691/CPPJ.22.1.131 (2018).
29. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T. & Mermelstein, R. A global measure of perceived stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 24(4), 385–396. h t t p s : / / d o i . o
r g / 1 0 . 2 3 0 7 / 2 1 3 6 4 0 4 (1983).
30. Yücel, I. Examining the relationships among job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and turnover intention: An empirical
study. IJBM. 7, 44–58. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v7n20p44 (2012).
31. Puchalska-Kamińska, M., Czerw, A., & Roczniewska, M. Work meaning in self and world perspective: A new outlook on the
WAMI scale. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 14(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.32872/spb.v14i1.30207 (2019).
32. Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J. & Duy, R. D. Measuring meaningful work: e Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). J. Career Assess.
20(3), 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072711436160 (2012).
33. Parboteeah, K. P., Weiss, M. & Hoegl, M. Ethical climates across national contexts: A meta-analytical investigation. J. Bus. Ethics
189, 573–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05387-z (2024).
34. Peterson, D. K. e relationship between unethical behavior and the dimensions of the Ethical Climate Questionnaire. J. Bus.
Ethics 41, 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021243117958 (2002).
35. Tsai, M. T. & Huang, C. C. e relationship among ethical climate types, facets of job satisfaction, and the three components of
organizational commitment: A study of nurses in Taiwan. J. Bus. Ethics 80(3), 565–581. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 0 7 / s 1 0 5 5 1 - 0 0 7 - 9 4 5
5 - 8 (2008).
36. Okpara, J. O. & Wynn, P. e impact of ethical climate on job satisfaction, and commitment in Nigeria: Implications for
management development. J. Manag. Dev. 27(9), 935–950. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710810901282 (2008).
37. Elçi, M. & Alpkan, L. e impact of perceived organizational ethical climate on work satisfaction. J. Bus. Ethics 84, 297–311.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9709-0 (2009).
38. Lemmergaard, J. & Lauridsen, J. e ethical climate of Danish Firms: A discussion and enhancement of the ethical-climate model.
J. Bus. Ethics 80, 653–675. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9461-x (2008).
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 9
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
39. Pew Research Center. Eastern and western europeans dier on importance of religion, views of minorities, and key social issues.
Available online: h t t p s : / / w w w . p e w f o r u m . o r g / 2 0 1 8 / 1 0 / 2 9 / e a s t e r n - a n d - w e s t e r n - e u r o p e a n s - d i e r - o n - i m p o r t a n c e o f r e l i g i o n - v i e w s
- o f - m i n o r i t i e s - a n d - k e y - s o c i a l - i s s u e s / (2018).
40. Deshpande, S. P., George, E. & Joseph, J. Ethical climates and managerial success in russian organizations. J. Bus. Ethics. 23,
211–217. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005943017693 (2000).
41. Allen, M. S., Iliescu, D. & Grei, S. Single item measures in psychological science: A call to action. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 38, 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000699 (2022).
Author contributions
Conceptualization, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; methodology, MW; formal analysis, MW; resources, AC, ACC, MW,
MZS; data curation, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; writing—original dra preparation, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; writing—
review and editing, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; visualization, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; supervision, ACC, MW; project
administration, ACC, MW; funding acquisition, AC, ACC, MW, MZS; correspondence, MZS. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Declarations
Competing interests
e authors declare no competing interests.
Ethics approval
e study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional
Review Board of SWPS University, Poland (WKEB89/11/2023).
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. Participants are all above the age of
18years, so no informed consent was needed from parents or guardians.
Additional information
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to M.Ż.-S.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional aliations.
Open Access is article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and
indicate if changes were made. e images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s
Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included
in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or
exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy
of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
© e Author(s) 2025
Scientic Reports | (2025) 15:8899 10
| https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-93990-7
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com
Content uploaded by Marcin Wnuk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Marcin Wnuk on Mar 14, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
