Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • A Critique of Contagion and Differentiation in Unethical Behavior

    Transféré par

    Paul Prae
    374 vues3 pages
    This study examines human behavior in regards to ethical actions in a social setting. The purpose of this study was to create a greater understanding of how people’s actions are affected by the unethical actions of those around them. In this study, the focus is on unethical behavior in the form of dishonesty. The researchers wanted to answer questions such as, “If a person witnesses a peer being dishonest, will this person be more likely to be dishonest themselves?” or “If someone mentions being dishonest, will this increase or decrease the likelihood of an observer also being dishonest?”. These questions and a few others were answered through the results of this study. Before the study occurred, the researchers established their hypotheses based on several preexisting theories as well as a few previous studies.

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formats disponibles

    PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    This study examines human behavior in regards to ethical actions in a social setting. The purpose of this study was to create a greater understanding of how people’s actions are affected by the unethical actions of those around them. In this study, the focus is on unethical behavior in the form of dishonesty. The researchers wanted to answer questions such as, “If a person witnesses a peer being dishonest, will this person be more likely to be dishonest themselves?” or “If someone mentions being dishonest, will this increase or decrease the likelihood of an observer also being dishonest?”. These questions and a few others were answered through the results of this study. Before the study occurred, the researchers established their hypotheses based on several preexisting theories as well as a few previous studies.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    374 vues3 pages

    A Critique of Contagion and Differentiation in Unethical Behavior

    Transféré par

    Paul Prae
    This study examines human behavior in regards to ethical actions in a social setting. The purpose of this study was to create a greater understanding of how people’s actions are affected by the unethical actions of those around them. In this study, the focus is on unethical behavior in the form of dishonesty. The researchers wanted to answer questions such as, “If a person witnesses a peer being dishonest, will this person be more likely to be dishonest themselves?” or “If someone mentions being dishonest, will this increase or decrease the likelihood of an observer also being dishonest?”. These questions and a few others were answered through the results of this study. Before the study occurred, the researchers established their hypotheses based on several preexisting theories as well as a few previous studies.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 3

    Student:PaulPrae Date:April19th,2011 PSYC4100:ArticleCritique2 ACritiqueofContagionandDifferentiationinUnethicalBehavior Thisstudyexamineshumanbehaviorinregardstoethicalactionsinasocialsetting.Thepurpose ofthisstudywastocreateagreaterunderstandingofhowpeoplesactionsareaffectedbytheunethical actionsofthosearoundthem.Inthisstudy,thefocusisonunethicalbehaviorintheformofdishonesty. Theresearcherswantedtoanswerquestionssuchas,Ifapersonwitnessesapeerbeingdishonest,will thispersonbemorelikelytobedishonestthemselves?orIfsomeonementionsbeingdishonest,will thisincreaseordecreasethelikelihoodofanobserveralsobeingdishonest?.Thesequestionsanda fewotherswereansweredthroughtheresultsofthisstudy.Beforethestudyoccurred,theresearchers establishedtheirhypothesesbasedonseveralpreexistingtheoriesaswellasafewpreviousstudies. Thearticlediscussedthreemainmechanismsthatcouldethicallyinfluenceanindividuals actions.Theresearchersbasedtheirhypothesesonthetheoriesbehindthesethreemechanisms.

    First, thepapermentionsthatanindividualscostbenefitanalysis,amechanismthatisusedtodecidewhat actionsareappropriatetotake,canbeinfluencedbyobservinganotherpersongettingawaywitha dishonestaction.Theresearchershypothesizedthatanindividualwillactmoredishonestlyifthey witnessanaccountofanotherindividualgettingawaywithadishonestaction.Thesecondsourceof influencethatthestudytakesintoconsiderationistheconceptofthesaliencyoftheethicsbehindan action.Thismechanismsuggeststhatwhentheethicsofanactionaremadereadilyapparenttoan individual,thisindividualwillthenselfreflectonhisorherownpotentialactions.Theresearchers hypothesizedthatthisselfreflectionwillthencausetheindividualtoprotecthisorherownmoral selfimagebyreducingtheindividualsinvolvementindishonestbehavior.Thethirdmechanism mentionedhastodowiththesocialnormtheory,whereindividualsaresaidtobehaveinrespectto whatpeopletendtodoandapproveof,andthesocialidentitytheory,whichstatesthattheinfluenceof unethicalbehaviorisrelativetohowcloseanindividualidentifieswiththesourceoftheunethical behavior.Theresearchershypothesizedthatanindividualwillbehavesimilartoaningroupmemberand willavoidimitatingtheunethicalbehaviorofanoutgroupmember.Thesethreehypothesesweretested usingtwodifferentexperiments.

    Inthefirstexperiment,theresearcherssetupfourdifferentscenarios.Thesescenarioswere identicalinallbutafewways.Ineachscenario,agroupofparticipantswereaskedtosolveaseriesof simplearithmeticproblemswithinafiveminutetimeperiod.Theywrotedownandsubmittedhowmany theywereabletosolve.Theseparticipantswereallowedtorewardthemselveswithacertainamountof moneyforeveryquestiontheygotright.Theywereaskedtoreturnthemoneytheydidnotearn.Each scenariowasdifferentbasedonsomecondition.Inthecontrolcondition,theexperimenterconfirmed thattheparticipantonlytookthemoneythattheyearned.Intheshreddercondition,theparticipants wereallowedtoshredtheevidenceoftheirworkandtakethemoneythattheysaidtheyearned.Inthe twoidentityconditions,everythingwasthesameasintheshredderconditionexceptanactormadeit obviousthatheorshewascheatingandwalkedawaywiththefullreward.Intheoutgroupidentity condition,theconfederateworearivalingcollegestshirt.Intheingroupidentitycondition,heorshe woreaplaintshirt.Thesecondexperimenthadallthesameconditionsaswiththefirstexperiment except,insteadofthetwoidentityconditions,therewasasaliencycondition.Thissaliencycondition wasidenticaltotheshredderconditionexceptthattherewasanactorwhospokeupandaskedifitwas OKtocheat.Heretheexperimenteransweredsayingthattheparticipantscandowhatevertheywant. Theresultsofthestudyshowedthatindividualsdoindeedchangetheirbehaviorbasedonthe unethicalbehaviorsofotherpeoplearoundthem.Inthefirstexperiment,theresearcherstookthe averagenumberofquestionseachparticipantsubmittedasgettingcorrectfromwithineachcondition. Eachconditionvariedinamountasfollows:thecontrolgrouphadtheleast,theoutgroupthesecond least,theshreddergroupthesecondmost,andtheingroupthemost.Theseoutcomesprovidedagood defenseforthesocialnormshypothesisbecausetheconfederatefromthetwoidentityconditions causedachangeincheatingincomparisontotheshreddercondition.Thesocialidentitytheorywas supportedbythefactthattheingroupconditionallowedformorecheatingthanboththeshredder conditionandtheoutgroupcondition.Theseoutcomesdonotsubstantiatethecostbenefitmechanism. Ifthismechanismwasatplay,thentheoccurrencesofcheatingwouldhavebeenthegreatestand approximatelyidenticalinbothoftheidentityconditions.Theresultsofthesecondexperimentshowed thatthecontrolconditionhadthesmallestamountofarithmeticproblemssolved,theshreddercondition reportedthemostbeingsolved,andthesaliencyconditionreportedanamountinbetweentheothertwo conditions.Theimportantconclusiontodrawfromexperimenttwowasthatthesaliencyofthesituation

    decreasedthedishonestyoftheparticipants.Thiswasderivedbyacomparisonofthesaliencycondition tothatoftheshreddercondition. Aswithanystudy,thisonehaditslimitations.Theresearchersdidhaverestrictionsonhowthey wereabletodesigntheirscenariostoimitaterealworldsituations.Forexample,thepossibledamageto theparticipantsselfimagewastheonlynegativeconsequenceofcheatinginthisstudy.Thislackof negativeconsequenceisnotnecessarilyrealistic.Ofcourse,theresearchersarelimitedbywhatis ethicalandreasonabletoimplementasanegativeconsequenceforaparticipantsunethicalactions. Anotherlimitationofthisstudywasthesimplefactthattheresearcherswerenotabletoreallygetinside themindsoftheparticipants.Iftheresearcherswereabletoknowtheexactdetailsbehindeach participantsdecisionmakingprocess,thatinformationwouldhavebeenhelpfulinunderstandingthe causesofeachparticipantsactions. Ibelievethisstudywasdesignedwell.Theykeptthestudyverysimpleandstraightforward.The improvementsthatdoexistwereprobablynotimplementedduetoalackofresourcessuchasfunding ortime.Animprovementforthisstudywouldbetoincorporateotherformsofunethicalbehavior (besideslying)intotheexperiments.Thiswouldpossiblyhaveprovideduswithamorewellrounded understandingofthecauseandeffectofdifferenttypesofunethicalsituations.Anotherimprovementthat couldhavebeenimplemented(andthattriestoaddressthemindreadinglimitationmentionedabove) wouldhavebeentointervieweachparticipantaftertheirsessionwascomplete.Thismayhaveprovided additionalinsightintothethoughtsbehindtheiractions. Thisstudyprovedtobequiteinterestingandinformative.Thisstudy,andthemanyotherslikeit, areimportanttohelpingusunderstandethicalhumanbehavior.Ethicsarecentraltomanyofourworlds greatestproblems.Manyaspectsofourlivesaredefinedbywhatisrightandwhatiswrong.Our futuresarestructuredbasedonourdecisionsandthedecisionsofthoseinoursociety.Thisstudybrings usonestepclosertodefiningthetruenatureofthemechanismsthatinfluenceourdecisionmaking process.Iamsurethisstudywillbeasolidsteppingstoneforfuturedevelopmentinthisarea.Itcreated empiricalevidencethatsupportedafewtheoriesandopposedothers.Thesenewlydiscovered constraintsonestablishedtheorieswillcertainlyadvanceresearchinthisfield.

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi