理解为什么有些揭发者受到尊敬,有些揭发者受到诋毁

Christopher Atkinson, E. Wesselmann, Daniel G. Lannin
{"title":"理解为什么有些揭发者受到尊敬,有些揭发者受到诋毁","authors":"Christopher Atkinson, E. Wesselmann, Daniel G. Lannin","doi":"10.26736/hs.2022.01.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whistleblowers are individuals who witness a moral infraction committed within their organization and report this infraction publicly to hold the group accountable. Whistleblowers often face ridicule, vilification, and exclusion both within their group and sometimes within broader society. Thus, whistleblowers put themselves at personal risk to adhere to their moral code and protect others; these criteria commonly classify someone as a hero. We argue diverse reactions to whistleblowers are influenced by numerous situational factors that influence perceptions of a whistleblower’s intentions as well as the expected consequences of their whistleblowing. Whether a whistleblower is viewed as a virtuous reformer (i.e., hero) or a harmful dissident may depend partly on the degree to which individuals believe that there is a discrepancy between an organization’s lived values and their stated values. While whistleblowers ostensibly provide evidence that this discrepancy exists, cognitive dissonance processes may forestall acceptance of this evidence in many cases. Believing that one is affiliated with a corrupt organization—while one also believes that they are a good, moral and adequate person—may lead to uncomfortable experiences of dissonance. It may be easier for many to reduce this dissonance by disparaging or discounting whistleblowers, rather than altering their own actions (which may involve becoming a whistleblower themselves) to reflect their personal values.","PeriodicalId":446177,"journal":{"name":"Heroism Science: An Interdisciplinary Journal","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding Why Some Whistleblowers are Venerated and Others Vilified\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Atkinson, E. Wesselmann, Daniel G. Lannin\",\"doi\":\"10.26736/hs.2022.01.06\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Whistleblowers are individuals who witness a moral infraction committed within their organization and report this infraction publicly to hold the group accountable. Whistleblowers often face ridicule, vilification, and exclusion both within their group and sometimes within broader society. Thus, whistleblowers put themselves at personal risk to adhere to their moral code and protect others; these criteria commonly classify someone as a hero. We argue diverse reactions to whistleblowers are influenced by numerous situational factors that influence perceptions of a whistleblower’s intentions as well as the expected consequences of their whistleblowing. Whether a whistleblower is viewed as a virtuous reformer (i.e., hero) or a harmful dissident may depend partly on the degree to which individuals believe that there is a discrepancy between an organization’s lived values and their stated values. While whistleblowers ostensibly provide evidence that this discrepancy exists, cognitive dissonance processes may forestall acceptance of this evidence in many cases. Believing that one is affiliated with a corrupt organization—while one also believes that they are a good, moral and adequate person—may lead to uncomfortable experiences of dissonance. It may be easier for many to reduce this dissonance by disparaging or discounting whistleblowers, rather than altering their own actions (which may involve becoming a whistleblower themselves) to reflect their personal values.\",\"PeriodicalId\":446177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Heroism Science: An Interdisciplinary Journal\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Heroism Science: An Interdisciplinary Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26736/hs.2022.01.06\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heroism Science: An Interdisciplinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26736/hs.2022.01.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

举报人是指目睹组织内部发生道德违规行为并公开举报以追究组织责任的个人。举报人经常在自己的团体内部,有时甚至在更广泛的社会中遭到嘲笑、诋毁和排斥。因此,举报人冒着个人风险,坚持自己的道德准则,保护他人;这些标准通常将某人归类为英雄。我们认为,对举报人的不同反应受到许多情境因素的影响,这些因素会影响对举报人意图的看法以及他们举报的预期后果。举报人被视为有道德的改革者(即英雄)还是有害的持不同政见者,可能部分取决于个人认为一个组织的实际价值观与他们宣称的价值观之间存在差异的程度。虽然举报人表面上提供了这种差异存在的证据,但在许多情况下,认知失调过程可能会阻止人们接受这种证据。认为自己隶属于一个腐败的组织,同时又认为自己是一个善良、有道德、称职的人,这可能会导致不和谐的不舒服经历。对于许多人来说,通过贬低或贬低举报人来减少这种不和谐可能更容易,而不是改变自己的行为(这可能涉及到自己成为举报人)来反映他们的个人价值观。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Understanding Why Some Whistleblowers are Venerated and Others Vilified
Whistleblowers are individuals who witness a moral infraction committed within their organization and report this infraction publicly to hold the group accountable. Whistleblowers often face ridicule, vilification, and exclusion both within their group and sometimes within broader society. Thus, whistleblowers put themselves at personal risk to adhere to their moral code and protect others; these criteria commonly classify someone as a hero. We argue diverse reactions to whistleblowers are influenced by numerous situational factors that influence perceptions of a whistleblower’s intentions as well as the expected consequences of their whistleblowing. Whether a whistleblower is viewed as a virtuous reformer (i.e., hero) or a harmful dissident may depend partly on the degree to which individuals believe that there is a discrepancy between an organization’s lived values and their stated values. While whistleblowers ostensibly provide evidence that this discrepancy exists, cognitive dissonance processes may forestall acceptance of this evidence in many cases. Believing that one is affiliated with a corrupt organization—while one also believes that they are a good, moral and adequate person—may lead to uncomfortable experiences of dissonance. It may be easier for many to reduce this dissonance by disparaging or discounting whistleblowers, rather than altering their own actions (which may involve becoming a whistleblower themselves) to reflect their personal values.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信