{"title":"个体和情境对组织情境下不道德行为倾向的影响","authors":"Zuleima Santalla-Banderali, Jose Malave","doi":"10.1177/18344909221097467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reports two studies evaluating the impact of moral intensity, work experience, and gender on the propensity (attitude, behavioral intention, and subjective norm) for unethical behavior of Venezuelan students and employees responding to different organizational scenarios, and controlling the effects of moral disengagement and empathy. One study singled out moral disengagement as a covariate, and the other did the same with empathy. In both studies, moral intensity, work experience, and gender acted as independent variables. Each study consisted of around 400 participants (totaling 801 participants in both studies): one-half were students without work experience and the other half were employees. For manipulating moral intensity, we used six scenarios describing ethically questionable situations. After reading each of the scenarios, participants answered the Multidimensional Ethics Scale to measure propensity for unethical behavior. After completing this phase, participants responded to the moral disengagement scale in Study 1 and the empathy scale in Study 2. This research did not find concluding, significant effects of moral intensity on the measures of the propensity for unethical behavior. Employees expressed higher intentions of acting unethically than students, though the effect was small (ε2 Study 1 = .016. ε2 Study 2 = .026). Gender had no significant effect on attitude and subjective norm; but, in behavioral intention, men's scores were significantly higher than women's in Study 1, but not in Study 2. Moral disengagement had a stronger effect than empathy on the propensity for unethical behavior (ε2 moral disengagement: attitude = .225, behavioral intention = .179, subjective norm = .159. ε2 empathy: attitude = .016, behavioral intention = .011, subjective norm = .010). The authors highlight the relevance of contrasting findings from less-developed countries with those from developed countries, commonly found in the literature, and suggest avenues for further research.","PeriodicalId":45049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual and situational influences on the propensity for unethical behavior in responses to organizational scenarios\",\"authors\":\"Zuleima Santalla-Banderali, Jose Malave\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18344909221097467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reports two studies evaluating the impact of moral intensity, work experience, and gender on the propensity (attitude, behavioral intention, and subjective norm) for unethical behavior of Venezuelan students and employees responding to different organizational scenarios, and controlling the effects of moral disengagement and empathy. One study singled out moral disengagement as a covariate, and the other did the same with empathy. In both studies, moral intensity, work experience, and gender acted as independent variables. Each study consisted of around 400 participants (totaling 801 participants in both studies): one-half were students without work experience and the other half were employees. For manipulating moral intensity, we used six scenarios describing ethically questionable situations. After reading each of the scenarios, participants answered the Multidimensional Ethics Scale to measure propensity for unethical behavior. After completing this phase, participants responded to the moral disengagement scale in Study 1 and the empathy scale in Study 2. This research did not find concluding, significant effects of moral intensity on the measures of the propensity for unethical behavior. Employees expressed higher intentions of acting unethically than students, though the effect was small (ε2 Study 1 = .016. ε2 Study 2 = .026). Gender had no significant effect on attitude and subjective norm; but, in behavioral intention, men's scores were significantly higher than women's in Study 1, but not in Study 2. Moral disengagement had a stronger effect than empathy on the propensity for unethical behavior (ε2 moral disengagement: attitude = .225, behavioral intention = .179, subjective norm = .159. ε2 empathy: attitude = .016, behavioral intention = .011, subjective norm = .010). The authors highlight the relevance of contrasting findings from less-developed countries with those from developed countries, commonly found in the literature, and suggest avenues for further research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45049,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18344909221097467\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18344909221097467","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Individual and situational influences on the propensity for unethical behavior in responses to organizational scenarios
This article reports two studies evaluating the impact of moral intensity, work experience, and gender on the propensity (attitude, behavioral intention, and subjective norm) for unethical behavior of Venezuelan students and employees responding to different organizational scenarios, and controlling the effects of moral disengagement and empathy. One study singled out moral disengagement as a covariate, and the other did the same with empathy. In both studies, moral intensity, work experience, and gender acted as independent variables. Each study consisted of around 400 participants (totaling 801 participants in both studies): one-half were students without work experience and the other half were employees. For manipulating moral intensity, we used six scenarios describing ethically questionable situations. After reading each of the scenarios, participants answered the Multidimensional Ethics Scale to measure propensity for unethical behavior. After completing this phase, participants responded to the moral disengagement scale in Study 1 and the empathy scale in Study 2. This research did not find concluding, significant effects of moral intensity on the measures of the propensity for unethical behavior. Employees expressed higher intentions of acting unethically than students, though the effect was small (ε2 Study 1 = .016. ε2 Study 2 = .026). Gender had no significant effect on attitude and subjective norm; but, in behavioral intention, men's scores were significantly higher than women's in Study 1, but not in Study 2. Moral disengagement had a stronger effect than empathy on the propensity for unethical behavior (ε2 moral disengagement: attitude = .225, behavioral intention = .179, subjective norm = .159. ε2 empathy: attitude = .016, behavioral intention = .011, subjective norm = .010). The authors highlight the relevance of contrasting findings from less-developed countries with those from developed countries, commonly found in the literature, and suggest avenues for further research.