儘管弊端揭發的制度設計可預防不倫理事件的發生；不過從實際執行的成果回顧，弊端揭發意圖似乎並不彰顯。經歸納過去的研究後可發現，過去研究者常以群體與個體層次的交互設計進行分析，但卻透過單一層次的統計分析，而這樣可能會得到偏差結果之推論。故本研究認為，弊端揭發議題有必要從多層次的研究設計進行分析，期望可以獲得更貼近現況的行為結果。並認為可嘗試從倫理領導與倫理組織認定探討群體對個體決策的調節效果影響。
本研究設計多層次分析的調節式中介模型，以進行群體對個體影響之實證分析。本研究採用問卷調查法進行資料蒐集與分析討論，共計回收 272 份有效之問卷進行分析，有效回收率為 62.9%。研究樣本的平均年齡與工作經驗為36.77歲與10.87年。運用SEM執行建構信度、效度分析後獲得良好的信度度結果呈現，同時也具備良好的適配指標。
分析發現：1. 組織成員揭發弊端時，舉發對象層級不同，有不同程度的弊端揭發意圖呈現。但整體而言，揭發弊端的意圖程度較高，採行的可能機率也較高。2. 弊端揭發意圖之呈現並無明確的分類結果呈現；其中，揭發弊端意圖與沉默離開意圖呈現一種抉擇 (trad-off) 的概念。然而，阻止弊端意圖的程度則是最低，採行的可能機率也偏低。3. 性別、婚姻狀況、薪資與知覺報復等控制變項，對弊端揭發意圖之呈現具有顯著的影響效果。4. 倫理責任判斷具備中介效果影響，高倫理責任判斷有助於組織內成員的揭發弊端意圖的呈現。結果將有助於不倫理事件的防止與預防。5. 倫理責任判斷具備中介效果影響，當組織內成員知覺不倫理事件的傷害嚴重程度不高時，會傾向於認同該事件且採取較保守的方式不發聲或離開的方式，隱匿或是忽視不倫理事件即將帶來的傷害與損失。6. 潛在傷害對倫理責任判斷的影響，僅受到倫理組織認定中： 「團隊利益」與 「公司效益」的調節影響；高程度的團體利益與公司效益的氛圍認定，具有強化提升潛在傷害對倫理責任判斷的影響效果。7. 倫理責任判斷對弊端揭發意圖的影響，會受到倫理領導的調節影響；其中，組織內具高程度的倫理領導知覺，有助於強化提升弊端揭發意圖的呈現，倫理領導的知覺愈高，揭發弊端的意圖程度愈高。同時，選擇沉默離開意圖與阻止弊端意圖的程度就會被弱化。 8.倫理組織認定與倫理領導之調節式中介效果顯著。最後，本研究提出影響弊端揭發意圖之跨層次決策分析流程圖供參考運用。

Although whistle-blowing mechanisms can inhibit malpractices, reality shows that they are not effective. In past studies, researchers often grounded analysis on interactions between the group and individual levels. However, the statistical analysis of single levels can lead to biased results. We believe that a multi-level research design is necessary to gain more realistic results for whistle-blowing issues and that ethical leadership and ethical organizational identity exert moderating effects on the influence of groups on the decisions of individuals.
This study adopted a moderated mediation model to conduct an empirical analysis on the influence of groups on individuals. A questionnaire survey was administered to collect data, in which 272 participations were recovered, thereby presenting a recovery rate of 62.9%. The average age and working experience of the respondents were 36.77 and 10.87 years. Construct reliability and validity analysis using SEM revealed good reliability and good goodness-of-fit.
The analysis results indicated the following. First, the outcomes of whistle-blowing intentions vary with level of the accused in the hierachy; however, firmer whistle-blowing intentions for the most part lead to a greater chance of implementation. Second, the outcomes of whistle-blowing intentions cannot be clearly categorized, but a trade-off is apparent between whistle-blowing and remaining silent. Intentions to deter malpractices were the lowest, and the possibility of actually doing so was also low. Third, the control variables, namely gender, marital status, salary, and perceived retaliation, have significant influence on the outcomes of whistle-blowing intentions. Fourth, judgment in ethical responsibility presented a mediating effect, and good judgment in ethical responsibility facilitates the outcomes of whistle-blowing intentions. The results assist in deterring and preventing unethical actions. Fifth, judgment in ethical responsibility has a significant mediating effect. When a member in an organization perceives that the extent of damage resulting from an unethical action is not high, they are inclined to agree with it, adopt a more conservative approach towards it, such as remaining silent or leaving, and conceal or ignore the damage and losses that it will bring.Sixth, only group interests and company benefits in ethical organizational identity mediate the influence of potential harm on judgment in ethical responsibility. The perception of high group interests and company benefits strengthens the influence of potential harm on judgment in ethical responsibility. Seventh, ethical leadership moderates the influence of judgment in ethical responsibility on whistle-blowing intentions; the widespread perception of ethical leadership in an organization strengthens and increases the outcomes of whistle-blowing intentions. At the same time, intentions to remain silent or deter malpractices are weakened. Eigth, the moderating effects of ethical organizational identity and ethical leadership are the most significant. Finally, this presented a cross-level decision analysis flowchart of factors influencing whistle-blowing intentions for reference.