When a person engages in a "game," that person may reason and behave in a manner that is inconsistent with non-game-situation moral reasoning. In this study we measured moral reasoning with the Defining Issues Test (DIT). We then engaged the students in a competitive game and collected accounts of their "reasoning" by having them explain their decisions with a forced choice inventory. The results indicate that there were significant inconsistencies in moral reasoning between non-game and game situations. The implications of (...) this for business ethics are discussed. (shrink)

This study investigated the effect of gender stereotypes on evaluator judgments of unethical behavior. Subjects were working adults who completed a mailed survey in which they evaluated unethical behavior depicted in written scenarios. Sex of the transgressor in the scenarios was manipulated. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses indicated that there are no stable differences in evaluations of men and women across scenarios. These results suggest that evaluators do not hold different standards of ethical behavior for men and women, they do (...) not make different causal attributions for the behavior of men and women, nor do evaluators treat men and women differently when an ethical transgression has been committed. (shrink)

Individual scapetribing is identified as pointing the finger of blame at organizations (or groups, institutions, and systems) as a means of excusing or inaccurately ascribing responsibility for one's own actions and their consequences. This type of behavior is shown to be related to corporate scape-goating as described by Wilson (1993). The paper addresses responsibility ascriptions and the importance of corporate responsibility as a significantly influential multi-person system.