IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0262201.html

Does moral commitment predict resistance to corruption? experimental evidence from a bribery game

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Tanner
  • Stefan Linder
  • Matthias Sohn

Abstract

Corruption is ubiquitous in practice and has severe negative consequences for organizations and societies at large. Drawing on a laboratory experiment, we propose that individuals high in moral commitment are less likely to engage in corrupt behaviors and prefer foregoing financial benefits. Specifically, we posit that individuals refrain from corruption (i) the more they endorse integrity (incorruptibility) as a protected value and (ii) the higher their level of Honesty-Humility. The results of a two-step experiment largely support our expectations: people who treat compromises to integrity as unacceptable were less willing to accept bribes, and Honesty-Humility decreased bribe-giving. The findings are robust to demographic variables (e.g., age, gender, cultural background) and additional personal characteristics (e.g., risk tolerance, dispositional greed) and have important implications for ongoing theory-building efforts and business practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Tanner & Stefan Linder & Matthias Sohn, 2022. "Does moral commitment predict resistance to corruption? experimental evidence from a bribery game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(1), pages 1-22, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0262201
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0262201
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0262201&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0262201?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Palanski, Michael E. & Yammarino, Francis J., 2007. "Integrity and Leadership:: Clearing the Conceptual Confusion," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 171-184, June.
    2. Benno Torgler & Neven T. Valev, 2010. "Gender And Public Attitudes Toward Corruption And Tax Evasion," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 28(4), pages 554-568, October.
    3. Raymond Fisman & Edward Miguel, 2007. "Corruption, Norms, and Legal Enforcement: Evidence from Diplomatic Parking Tickets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(6), pages 1020-1048, December.
    4. Jaworski, Bernard J. & Young, S. Mark, 1992. "Dysfunctional behavior and management control: An empirical study of marketing managers," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 17-35, January.
    5. Scott Atran & Robert Axelrod & Richard Davis, 2007. "Sacred barriers to conflict resolution," Post-Print ijn_00505181, HAL.
    6. Eugen Dimant & Guglielmo Tosato, 2018. "Causes And Effects Of Corruption: What Has Past Decade'S Empirical Research Taught Us? A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 335-356, April.
    7. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    8. Sina A. Klein & Isabel Thielmann & Benjamin E. Hilbig & Ingo Zettler, 2017. "Between me and we: The importance of self-profit versus social justifiability for ethical decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(6), pages 563-571, November.
    9. Klaus Abbink & Heike Hennig-Schmidt, 2006. "Neutral versus loaded instructions in a bribery experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 103-121, June.
    10. Rajna Gibson & Carmen Tanner & Alexander F. Wagner, 2013. "Preferences for Truthfulness: Heterogeneity among and within Individuals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 532-548, February.
    11. Barr, Abigail & Serra, Danila, 2010. "Corruption and culture: An experimental analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 862-869, December.
    12. Fan, C. Simon & Lin, Chen & Treisman, Daniel, 2009. "Political decentralization and corruption: Evidence from around the world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 14-34, February.
    13. Daniel W. Heck & Isabel Thielmann & Morten Moshagen & Benjamin E. Hilbig, 2018. "Who lies? A large-scale reanalysis linking basic personality traits to unethical decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(4), pages 356-371, July.
    14. Cameron, Lisa & Chaudhuri, Ananish & Erkal, Nisvan & Gangadharan, Lata, 2009. "Propensities to engage in and punish corrupt behavior: Experimental evidence from Australia, India, Indonesia and Singapore," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 843-851, August.
    15. Peter Mudrack & James Bloodgood & William Turnley, 2012. "Some Ethical Implications of Individual Competitiveness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 347-359, July.
    16. Madelijne Gorsira & Adriaan Denkers & Wim Huisman, 2018. "Both Sides of the Coin: Motives for Corruption Among Public Officials and Business Employees," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 179-194, August.
    17. Swamy, Anand & Knack, Stephen & Lee, Young & Azfar, Omar, 2001. "Gender and corruption," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 25-55, February.
    18. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    19. Yan Li & Fiona Yao & David Ahlstrom, 2015. "The social dilemma of bribery in emerging economies: A dynamic model of emotion, social value, and institutional uncertainty," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 311-334, June.
    20. Paldam, Martin, 2002. "The cross-country pattern of corruption: economics, culture and the seesaw dynamics," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 215-240, June.
    21. Christian Hauser, 2019. "Fighting Against Corruption: Does Anti-corruption Training Make Any Difference?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 281-299, September.
    22. Burroughs, James E & Rindfleisch, Aric, 2002. "Materialism and Well-Being: A Conflicting Values Perspective," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(3), pages 348-370, December.
    23. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    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. Alice Guerra & Tatyana Zhuravleva, 2022. "Do women always behave as corruption cleaners?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 173-192, April.
    2. Jetter, Michael & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2018. "Sorting through global corruption determinants: Institutions and education matter – Not culture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 279-294.
    3. Jiang, Shuguang & Wei, Qian, 2022. "Confucian culture, moral reminder, and soft corruption," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. He, Haoran & Jiang, Shuguang, 2020. "Partisan culture, identity and corruption: An experiment based on the Chinese Communist Party," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Sheheryar Banuri & Catherine Eckel, 2015. "Cracking down on bribery," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(3), pages 579-600, October.
    6. Michael Jetter & Christopher F. Parmeter, 2016. "Uncovering the determinants of corruption," Working Papers 2016-02, University of Miami, Department of Economics.
    7. Fahr, René & Djawadi, Behnud Mir, 2012. "The impact of risk perception and risk attitudes on corrupt behavior: Evidence from a petty corruption experiment," VfS Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62022, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    8. Levati, M. Vittoria & Nardi, Chiara, 2023. "Letting third parties who suffer from petty corruption talk: Evidence from a collusive bribery experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Salmon, Timothy C. & Serra, Danila, 2017. "Corruption, social judgment and culture: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 64-78.
    10. Krisztina Kis-Katos & Günther G. Schulze, 2013. "Corruption in Southeast Asia: a survey of recent research," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, The Crawford School, The Australian National University, vol. 27(1), pages 79-109, May.
    11. Rajeev K. Goel & Michael A. Nelson, 2021. "Corrupt encounters of the fairer sex: female entrepreneurs and their corruption perceptions/experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 1973-1994, December.
    12. Paulo Arvate & Sergio Mittlaender, 2017. "Condemning corruption while condoning inefficiency: an experimental investigation into voting behavior," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 399-419, September.
    13. Jiang, T., 2015. "Social preferences, culture and corruption," Other publications TiSEM 488aa1b0-f588-4c1b-8a85-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Couttenier, Mathieu & Toubal, Farid, 2017. "Corruption for sales," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 56-66.
    15. Jiang, Shuguang & Wei, Qian & Zhao, Lei, 2024. "Synergizing anti-corruption strategies: Group monitoring and endogenous crackdown – An experimental investigation," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Abbink, Klaus & Wu, Kevin, 2017. "Reward self-reporting to deter corruption: An experiment on mitigating collusive bribery," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 256-272.
    17. Maria Vittoria Levati & Chiara Nardi, 2019. "The power of words in a petty corruption experiment," Working Papers 18/2019, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    18. Nina Bobkova & Henrik Egbert, 2012. "Corruption Investigated in the Lab: A Survey of the Experimental Literature," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 2(4), pages 337-337.
    19. Shuguang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2022. "Dishonesty in Developing Countries -What Can We Learn From Experiments?," Working Papers hal-03899654, HAL.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0262201. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.