IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v18y2023i1p117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personality Traits and Whistleblowing on Twitter: The Moderating Roles of Moral Identity and Politics Perceptions

Author

Listed:
  • Feiyan Chen
  • Shengmin Liu

Abstract

The present study examines the impact of the Big Five personality on whistleblowing behaviors on Twitter. Meanwhile, two opposite moderators are explored that the weak situations of whistleblowing on Twitter can activate users' trait. Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses, with the Big Five personality traits as predictors and whistleblowing behaviors on Twitter as criterion variables. First, individuals high in extraversion and conscientiousness tend to perform both the original and retweeting whistleblowing on Twitter; Individuals low in agreeableness are more likely to reveal original wrongdoing information, while those high in agreeableness tend to retweet information; individuals high in openness enjoy retweeting but not original whistleblowing. The degree of moral identity moderates the positive relationship between extraversion / agreeable / conscientiousness and (retweeting) whistleblowing on Twitter, such that the relationship is stronger as moral identity increases. The degree of politics perceptions moderates the relationship between extraversion/agreeable/conscientiousness and (retweeting) whistleblowing on Twitter, such that the relationship is weaker as politics perceptions increases. The degree of moral identity moderates the negative relationship between agreeableness and original whistleblowing on Twitter, such that the relationship is weaker as moral identity increases. The degree of politics perceptions moderates the negative relationship between agreeableness and original whistleblowing on Twitter, such that the relationship is stronger as politics perceptions increases. This paper gives a form of weak situations on whistleblowing. A pair of opposite cues may build the weak situations. Modern identity shows the positive power for potential whistleblowers to express their trait, while politics perceptions prevent them exert personality by whistleblowing. The paradox situations could give a behavioral model how observers with different traits respond to the wrongdoings in these situations.

Suggested Citation

  • Feiyan Chen & Shengmin Liu, 2023. "Personality Traits and Whistleblowing on Twitter: The Moderating Roles of Moral Identity and Politics Perceptions," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 18(1), pages 117-117, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:18:y:2023:i:1:p:117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/0/0/48217/51843
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/0/48217
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jingyu Gao & Robert Greenberg & Bernard Wong-On-Wing, 2015. "Whistleblowing Intentions of Lower-Level Employees: The Effect of Reporting Channel, Bystanders, and Wrongdoer Power Status," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 85-99, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gary M. Fleischman & Eric N. Johnson & Kenton B. Walker & Sean R. Valentine, 2019. "Ethics Versus Outcomes: Managerial Responses to Incentive-Driven and Goal-Induced Employee Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(4), pages 951-967, September.
    2. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2021. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 517-535, March.
    3. Choo, Lawrence & Grimm, Veronika & Horváth, Gergely & Nitta, Kohei, 2019. "Whistleblowing and diffusion of responsibility: An experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 287-301.
    4. Verschuuren, Pim, 2020. "Whistleblowing determinants and the effectiveness of reporting channels in the international sports sector," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 142-154.
    5. Hengky Latan & Christian M. Ringle & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour, 2018. "Whistleblowing Intentions Among Public Accountants in Indonesia: Testing for the Moderation Effects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 573-588, October.
    6. Lee, Gladys & Xiao, Xinning, 2018. "Whistleblowing on accounting-related misconduct: A synthesis of the literature," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 22-46.
    7. Charles Guandaru Kamau & Samuel Nduati Kariuki & David Nandasaba Musuya, 2017. "Exploring the Motivation behind Leakage of Internal Audit Reports (Whistle Blowing) in the Public Sector in Kenya," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 7(3), pages 48-57, July.
    8. Elka Johansson & Peter Carey, 2016. "Detecting Fraud: The Role of the Anonymous Reporting Channel," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 391-409, December.
    9. Fangjun Xiao & Bernard Wong-On-Wing, 2022. "Employee Sensitivity to the Risk of Whistleblowing via Social Media: The Role of Social Media Strategy and Policy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(2), pages 519-542, November.
    10. Jing Zhou & Shibin Sheng & Chuang Zhang, 2022. "Deterring Unethical Behaviors in Marketing Channels: The Role of Distributor Whistleblowing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 97-115, November.
    11. Trevor M. Spoelma & Nitya Chawla & Aleksander P. J. Ellis, 2021. "If You Can’t Join ‘Em, Report ‘Em: A Model of Ostracism and Whistleblowing in Teams," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(2), pages 345-363, October.
    12. Barbara Culiberg & Katarina Katja Mihelič, 2017. "The Evolution of Whistleblowing Studies: A Critical Review and Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(4), pages 787-803, December.
    13. Jawad Khan & Imran Saeed & Muhammad Zada & Amna Ali & Nicolás Contreras-Barraza & Guido Salazar-Sepúlveda & Alejandro Vega-Muñoz, 2022. "Examining Whistleblowing Intention: The Influence of Rationalization on Wrongdoing and Threat of Retaliation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-20, February.
    14. Logan L. Watts & M. Ronald Buckley, 2017. "A Dual-Processing Model of Moral Whistleblowing in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 669-683, December.
    15. Dina El-Bassiouny & Amr Kotb & Hany Elbardan & Noha El-Bassiouny, 2023. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle? An Islamic Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(2), pages 385-404, October.
    16. Alleyne, Philmore & Haniffa, Roszaini & Hudaib, Mohammad, 2019. "Does group cohesion moderate auditors’ whistleblowing intentions?," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 69-90.
    17. Brink, Alisa G. & Eller, C. Kevin & Gao, Lei, 2021. "He wouldn't, but I would: The effects of pronoun-induced language vividness in whistleblowing policies," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    18. Thomas Stöber & Peter Kotzian & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Design matters: on the impact of compliance program design on corporate ethics," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(2), pages 383-424, December.
    19. Grimm, Veronika & Choo, Lawrence & Horvath, Gergely & Nitta, Kohei, 2016. "Whistleblowing and Diffusion of Responsibility: An Experimental Investigation," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145781, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:ijbmjn:v:18:y:2023:i:1:p:117. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.