David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 106 (3):337-352 (2012)
We extend prior research of deceitful behavior by studying the reactions of those who are targets of deception and how a specific attribute of communication media, cue multiplicity , influences such reactions. We report on a laboratory experiment involving dyads asked to engage in a stock share purchase exercise. We find that when a broker is perceived to act deceitfully by the buyer, the buyer reacts with negative affect (anger) which provokes subsequent acts of revenge against the broker. Importantly, we find that media with higher cue multiplicity attenuate buyer anger as well as lessen the propensity for the buyer to seek retaliatory acts of revenge. We further find that moral anger mediates the effect of buyers’ perceived deception on revenge
|Keywords||Cue multiplicity Deception Moral anger Positive affect Revenge Interpersonal deception theory (IDT)|
|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
Scott J. Vitell, Joseph G. P. Paolillo & Jatinder J. Singh (2006). The Role of Money and Religiosity in Determining Consumers' Ethical Beliefs. Journal of Business Ethics 64 (2):117 - 124.
David Fritzsche & E. Oz (2007). Personal Values' Influence on the Ethical Dimension of Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics 75 (4):335 - 343.
Vitell Scott John, N. Bing Mark, Davison H. Kristl, P. Ammeter Anthony, L. Garner Bart & M. Novicevic Milorad (2009). Religiosity and Moral Identity: The Mediating Role of Self-Control. Journal of Business Ethics 88 (4):601-613.
Paul E. Johnson, Stefano Grazioli, Karim Jamal & R. Glen Berryman (2001). Detecting Deception: Adversarial Problem Solving in a Low Base‐Rate World. Cognitive Science 25 (3):355-392.
Paul M. Hughes (1995). Moral Anger, Forgiving, and Condoning. Journal of Social Philosophy 26 (1):103-118.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Eric Funkhouser (2005). Do the Self-Deceived Get What They Want? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (3):295-312.
Ramazan Kaynak & Tuba Sert (2012). The Impact of Service Supplier's Unethical Behavior to Buyer's Satisfaction: An Empirical Study. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 109 (2):219-226.
Ronald C. Arnett (2011). Multiplicity, Complexity, and the Necessity of Limits. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26 (2):176 - 178.
Edgar Erdfelder & Martin Brandt (2000). How Good Are Fast and Frugal Inference Heuristics in Case of Limited Knowledge? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):747-748.
Cathryn M. Button, Malcolm J. Grant & Brent Snook (2011). A Judgement Analysis of Social Perceptions of Attitudes and Ability. Thinking and Reasoning 15 (4):319-336.
Andrew Haas (2000). Hegel and the Problem of Multiplicity. Northwestern University Press.
Douglas N. Walton (2007). Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric. Cambridge University Press.
Richard D. Anderson (1998). The Place of the Media in Popular Democracy. Critical Review 12 (4):481-500.
Clifford G. Christians (2008). Media Ethics on a Higher Order of Magnitude. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 23 (1):3 – 14.
Maria Virginia Halter, Maria Cecilia Coutinho de Arruda & Ralph Bruno Halter (2009). Transparency to Reduce Corruption? Journal of Business Ethics 84 (3):373-385.
Jay Black (2008). An Informal Agenda for Media Ethicists. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 23 (1):28 – 35.
Added to index2011-09-01
Total downloads43 ( #112,849 of 1,925,764 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #308,517 of 1,925,764 )
How can I increase my downloads?