{"title":"Holistic thinking and risk-taking perceptions reduce risk-taking intentions: ethical, financial, and health/safety risks across genders and cultures","authors":"Jingqiu Chen, Thomas Li-Ping Tang, ChaoRong Wu","doi":"10.1007/s13520-022-00152-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Holistic thinking involves four subconstructs: causality, contradiction, attention to the whole, and change. This holistic perspective varies across Eastern–Western cultures and genders. We theorize that holistic thinking reduces three domain-specific risk-taking behavioral intentions (ethical, financial, and health/safety) directly and indirectly through enhanced risk-taking attitudes. Our formative theoretical model treats the four subconstructs of holistic thinking as yoked antecedents and frames it in a proximal context of causes and consequences. We simultaneously explore the direct and indirect paths and test our model across cultures, genders, and the combination of the two. For the entire sample (<i>N</i> = 531), holistic thinking negatively relates to risk intentions via enhanced risk perceptions. Across cultures, the indirect paths prevail among Chinese people (<i>n</i> = 284), and both direct and indirect paths triumph for Americans (<i>n</i> = 247). Across genders, the indirect paths exist for females, whereas the negative direct path (risk-raking attitudes → behavioral intentions) succeeds for males. Across cultures and genders, holistic thinking negatively relates to American males’ ethical risks the most but Chinese males’ financial risks the least. Risk-taking perceptions are negatively related to Chinese males’ ethical risks the most, but Chinese people’s (males/females) financial risks the least. Causality and change are vital for all contexts, attention to the whole for all males and Chinese males, and contradiction for Americans and all females. Holistic thinking has limits and is less robust than risk-taking perceptions in reducing risky behavioral intentions. Our practical implications help people make ethical, healthy, and wealthy decisions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54051,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Business Ethics","volume":"11 2","pages":"295 - 325"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Business Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13520-022-00152-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Holistic thinking involves four subconstructs: causality, contradiction, attention to the whole, and change. This holistic perspective varies across Eastern–Western cultures and genders. We theorize that holistic thinking reduces three domain-specific risk-taking behavioral intentions (ethical, financial, and health/safety) directly and indirectly through enhanced risk-taking attitudes. Our formative theoretical model treats the four subconstructs of holistic thinking as yoked antecedents and frames it in a proximal context of causes and consequences. We simultaneously explore the direct and indirect paths and test our model across cultures, genders, and the combination of the two. For the entire sample (N = 531), holistic thinking negatively relates to risk intentions via enhanced risk perceptions. Across cultures, the indirect paths prevail among Chinese people (n = 284), and both direct and indirect paths triumph for Americans (n = 247). Across genders, the indirect paths exist for females, whereas the negative direct path (risk-raking attitudes → behavioral intentions) succeeds for males. Across cultures and genders, holistic thinking negatively relates to American males’ ethical risks the most but Chinese males’ financial risks the least. Risk-taking perceptions are negatively related to Chinese males’ ethical risks the most, but Chinese people’s (males/females) financial risks the least. Causality and change are vital for all contexts, attention to the whole for all males and Chinese males, and contradiction for Americans and all females. Holistic thinking has limits and is less robust than risk-taking perceptions in reducing risky behavioral intentions. Our practical implications help people make ethical, healthy, and wealthy decisions.
期刊介绍：
The Asian Journal of Business Ethics (AJBE) publishes original articles from a wide variety of methodological and disciplinary perspectives concerning ethical issues related to business in Asia, including East, Southeast and South-central Asia. Like its well-known sister publication Journal of Business Ethics, AJBE examines the moral dimensions of production, consumption, labour relations, and organizational behavior, while taking into account the unique societal and ethical perspectives of the Asian region. The term ''business'' is understood in a wide sense to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services, while ''ethics'' is understood as applying to all human action aimed at securing a good life. We believe that issues concerning corporate responsibility are within the scope of ethics broadly construed. Systems of production, consumption, marketing, advertising, social and economic accounting, labour relations, public relations and organizational behaviour will be analyzed from a moral or ethical point of view. The style and level of dialogue involve all who are interested in business ethics - the business community, universities, government agencies, non-government organizations and consumer groups.The AJBE viewpoint is especially relevant today, as global business initiatives bring eastern and western companies together in new and ever more complex patterns of cooperation and competition.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
