IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v126y2015icp115-129.html

The effect of specific and general rules on ethical decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Mulder, Laetitia B.
  • Jordan, Jennifer
  • Rink, Floor

Abstract

We examined the effects of specific and general rules on ethical decisions and demonstrated, across five studies, that specifically-framed rules elicited ethical decisions more strongly than generally-framed rules. The effectiveness of specific rules was explained by reductions in people’s moral rationalizations. Alternative explanations that people feared being caught and punished or that people perceive no clear connection between general rules and the ethical decision, were ruled out. General rules exerted some effect on ethical decisions. In fact, whereas specific rules failed to affect ethical decisions that did not explicitly correspond with the rule, the effect of the general rule depended less on the type of behavior a person encountered. Our findings further suggest that combining a specific with a general rule provided no additive advantage, as people may interpret the general rule in light of the specific rule. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Mulder, Laetitia B. & Jordan, Jennifer & Rink, Floor, 2015. "The effect of specific and general rules on ethical decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 115-129.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:126:y:2015:i:c:p:115-129
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597814001010
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.11.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hsee, Christopher K., 1996. "Elastic Justification: How Unjustifiable Factors Influence Judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 122-129, April.
    2. Cooter, Robert, 1998. "Expressive Law and Economics," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(2), pages 585-608, June.
    3. Feldman Yuval & Harel Alon, 2008. "Social Norms, Self-Interest and Ambiguity of Legal Norms: An Experimental Analysis of the Rule vs. Standard Dilemma," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 81-126, April.
    4. Gino, Francesca & Schweitzer, Maurice E. & Mead, Nicole L. & Ariely, Dan, 2011. "Unable to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 191-203, July.
    5. Laetitia Mulder & Rob Nelissen, 2010. "When Rules Really Make a Difference: The Effect of Cooperation Rules and Self-Sacrificing Leadership on Moral Norms in Social Dilemmas," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 57-72, September.
    6. Schweitzer, Maurice E & Hsee, Christopher K, 2002. "Stretching the Truth: Elastic Justification and Motivated Communication of Uncertain Information," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 185-201, September.
    7. Yuval Feldman, 2009. "The Expressive Function of Trade Secret Law: Legality, Cost, Intrinsic Motivation, and Consensus," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 177-212, March.
    8. Campbell, Tom, 2006. "A Human Rights Approach to Developing Voluntary Codes of Conduct for Multinational Corporations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 255-269, April.
    9. Thompson, Leigh & Loewenstein, George, 1992. "Egocentric interpretations of fairness and interpersonal conflict," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 176-197, March.
    10. Sama, Linda M., 2006. "Interactive Effects of External Environmental Conditions and Internal Firm Characteristics on MNEs’ Choice of Strategy in the Development of a Code of Conduct," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 137-165, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. McKenzie R. Rees & Ann E. Tenbrunsel & Kristina A. Diekmann, 2022. "“It’s Just Business”: Understanding How Business Frames Differ from Ethical Frames and the Effect on Unethical Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 429-449, March.
    2. Mulder, Laetitia B. & Rink, Floor & Jordan, Jennifer, 2020. "Constraining temptation: How specific and general rules mitigate the effect of personal gain on unethical behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Dekel Omer & Dotan Yoav, 2018. "Will Procurement Officials be Biased to Disregard Procurement Rules in Favor of a Low-priced, Albeit Defective, Bid?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(2), pages 1-30, July.
    4. Shahidul Hassan & Sheela Pandey & Sanjay K. Pandey, 2021. "Should Managers Provide General or Specific Ethical Guidelines to Employees: Insights from a Mixed Methods Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 563-580, September.
    5. Leib, Margarita & Schweitzer, Maurice, 2020. "Peer Behavior Profoundly Influences Dishonesty: Will Individuals Seek-out Information about Peers’ Dishonesty?," OSF Preprints 3pwcg, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mulder, Laetitia B. & Rink, Floor & Jordan, Jennifer, 2020. "Constraining temptation: How specific and general rules mitigate the effect of personal gain on unethical behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    2. Yuval Feldman & Eliran Halali, 2019. "Regulating “Good” People in Subtle Conflicts of Interest Situations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 65-83, January.
    3. Jeffrey Hales, 2007. "Directional Preferences, Information Processing, and Investors' Forecasts of Earnings," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 45(3), pages 607-628, June.
    4. Laetitia B. Mulder, 2018. "When sanctions convey moral norms," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 331-342, December.
    5. Shalvi, Shaul & Dana, Jason & Handgraaf, Michel J.J. & De Dreu, Carsten K.W., 2011. "Justified ethicality: Observing desired counterfactuals modifies ethical perceptions and behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 181-190, July.
    6. Liora Zimerman & Shaul Shalvi & Yoella Bereby-Meyer, 2014. "Self-reported ethical risk taking tendencies predict actual dishonesty," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(1), pages 58-64, January.
    7. Berenike Waubert de Puiseau & Andreas Glöckner & Emanuel V. Towfigh, 2019. "Integrating theories of law obedience: How utility-theoretic factors, legitimacy, and lack of self-control influence decisions to commit low-level crimes," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(3), pages 318-334, May.
    8. Farrow, Katherine & Romaniuc, Rustam, 2019. "The stickiness of norms," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 54-62.
    9. Gino, Francesca & Ayal, Shahar & Ariely, Dan, 2013. "Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 285-292.
    10. Rafael Di Tella & Ricardo Perez-Truglia, 2010. "Conveniently Upset: Avoiding Altruism by Distorting Beliefs About Others," NBER Working Papers 16645, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Hung-Lin Tao, 2013. "Informational Ambiguity and Survey Bias: Husbands’ and Wives’ Reports on Their Contribution to Their Families," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 713-724, May.
    12. Rustam Romaniuc & Katherine Farrow & Lisette Ibanez & Alain Marciano, 2016. "The perils of government enforcement," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 161-182, January.
    13. Jun Han & Hun‐Tong Tan, 2010. "Investors' Reactions to Management Earnings Guidance: The Joint Effect of Investment Position, News Valence, and Guidance Form," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 48(1), pages 81-104, March.
    14. Xiaoming Zheng & Xin Qin & Xin Liu & Hui Liao, 2019. "Will Creative Employees Always Make Trouble? Investigating the Roles of Moral Identity and Moral Disengagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(3), pages 653-672, July.
    15. Mayorga, Diane & Trotman, Ken T., 2016. "The effects of a reasonable investor perspective and firm's prior disclosure policy on managers' disclosure judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 50-62.
    16. Romaniuc Rustam, 2016. "What Makes Law to Change Behavior? An Experimental Study," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 447-475, July.
    17. Chiara Berneri & Shaun Larcom & Congmin Peng & Po-Wen She, 2024. "The impact of law on moral and social norms: evidence from facemask fines in the UK," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 311-346, June.
    18. DeKay, Michael L. & Patiño-Echeverri, Dalia & Fischbeck, Paul S., 2009. "Distortion of probability and outcome information in risky decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 79-92, May.
    19. Rostami, Amin & Gabler, Colin & Agnihotri, Raj, 2019. "Under pressure: The pros and cons of putting time pressure on your salesforce," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 153-162.
    20. Yuval Feldman & Tom R. Tyler, 2012. "Mandated justice: The potential promise and possible pitfalls of mandating procedural justice in the workplace," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 46-65, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:126:y:2015:i:c:p:115-129. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.