Breaking the rules: Examining the facilitation effects of moral intensity characteristics on the recognition of rule violations [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 78 (1-2):275 - 289 (2008)
This research project seeks to discover whether certain characteristics of a moral issue facilitate individuals’ abilities to detect violators of a conditional rule. In business, conditional rules are often framed in terms of a social contract between employer and employee. Of significant concern to business ethicists is the fact that these social contracts are frequently breached. Some researchers in the field of evolutionary psychology argue that there is a biological basis to social contract formation and dissolution in business. However, although it is inescapable that biological forces shaped a fixed neural structure that guides and limits humans’ abilities, we argue that characteristics of the situation in which the person finds himself or herself moderate the activation of these neural circuits in ordinary business social contract situations. Specifically, the moral intensity associated with the social contract conditional rule is likely to influence peoples’ abilities to detect violators of the rule. This study utilizes adapted versions of the Wason selection task and manipulates the issue-contingent moral intensity characteristics of magnitude of consequences, proximity, and social consensus to assess if moral intensity facilitates detection of rule violators. Results from this empirical study indicate no relationship between moral intensity characteristics and issue recognition but do provide insights into the evolutionary psychology approach.
|Keywords||moral intensity ethical decision-making issue recognition social contracts evolutionary psychology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides & John Tooby (eds.) (1992). The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. Oxford University Press.
Leda Cosmides (1989). The Logic of Social Exchange: Has Natural Selection Shaped How Humans Reason? Studies with the Wason Selection Task. Cognition 31 (3):187-276.
Gerd Gigerenzer & Klaus Hug (1992). Domain-Specific Reasoning: Social Contracts, Cheating, and Perspective Change. Cognition 43 (2):127-171.
William R. Shadish (2001). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Citations of this work BETA
Kanika T. Bhal & Anubha Dadhich (2011). Impact of Ethical Leadership and Leader–Member Exchange on Whistle Blowing: The Moderating Impact of the Moral Intensity of the Issue. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 103 (3):485-496.
Nitish Singh, Yung-Hwal Park & Kevin Lehnert (2015). Research Note and Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: Boundary Conditions and Extensions. Journal of Business Ethics 129 (1):195-219.
Jeffrey A. Roberts & David M. Wasieleski (2012). Moral Reasoning in Computer-Based Task Environments: Exploring the Interplay Between Cognitive and Technological Factors on Individuals' Propensity to Break Rules. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 110 (3):355-376.
Chris M. Bell & Kelley J. Main (2011). Deonance and Distrust: Motivated Third Party Information Seeking Following Disclosure of an Agent's Unethical Behavior. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 102 (1):77-96.
Yi-Ming Yu (2015). Comparative Analysis of Jones’ and Kelley’s Ethical Decision-Making Models. Journal of Business Ethics 130 (3):573-583.
Similar books and articles
Sean Valentine & David Hollingworth (2012). Moral Intensity, Issue Importance, and Ethical Reasoning in Operations Situations. Journal of Business Ethics 108 (4):509 - 523.
Patricia C. Kelley & Dawn R. Elm (2003). The Effect of Context on Moral Intensity of Ethical Issues: Revising Jones's Issue-Contingent Model. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 48 (2):139 - 154.
Joan Marie McMahon & Robert J. Harvey (2007). The Effect of Moral Intensity on Ethical Judgment. Journal of Business Ethics 72 (4):335 - 357.
Deborah L. Leitsch (2004). Differences in the Perceptions of Moral Intensity in the Moral Decision Process: An Empirical Examination of Accounting Students. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 53 (3):313-323.
Sefa Hayibor & David M. Wasieleski (2009). Effects of the Use of the Availability Heuristic on Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics 84 (1):151 - 165.
Thomas R. Shaw (2003). The Moral Intensity of Privacy: An Empirical Study of Webmasters' Attitudes. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 46 (4):301 - 318.
Sean R. Valentine & Connie R. Bateman (2011). The Impact of Ethical Ideologies, Moral Intensity, and Social Context on Sales-Based Ethical Reasoning. Journal of Business Ethics 102 (1):155-168.
Joan M. McMahon & Robert J. Harvey (2006). An Analysis of the Factor Structure of Jones' Moral Intensity Construct. Journal of Business Ethics 64 (4):381 - 404.
Sara A. Morris & Robert A. McDonald (1995). The Role of Moral Intensity in Moral Judgments: An Empirical Investigation. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 14 (9):715 - 726.
Andrey Chia & Swee Mee Lim (2000). The Effects of Issue Characteristics on the Recognition of Moral Issues. Journal of Business Ethics 27 (3):255-269.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #175,574 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #231,316 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?