IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reihed/v63y2022i5d10.1007_s11162-021-09669-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Would you Bribe your Lecturer? A Quasi-experimental Study on Burnout and Bribery in Higher Education

Author

Listed:
  • Kristina S. Weißmüller

    (Universität Bern)

  • Lode Waele

    (Tilburg University
    University of Antwerp)

Abstract

Bribery is a complex and critical issue in higher education (HE), causing severe economic and societal harm. Traditionally, most scholarship on HE corruption has focused on institutional factors in developing countries and insights into the psychological and motivational factors that drive HE bribery on the micro-level mechanisms are virtually non-existent. To close this research gap, this study investigates the connection between study-related burnout and university students’ willingness to offer bribes to their lecturers to pass important exams. Conducting a vignette-based quasi-experimental replication study with 624 university students in Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands we find that university students in three countries differentiate sharply between different shades of bribery and that a majority accept using emotional influence tactics to pass (failed) exams. In contrast, offering a helping hand or money (i.e., darker shades of bribery) to their lecturer was less acceptable. Study-related burnout is associated with a higher likelihood of engaging in these darker shades of bribery and students’ commitment to the public interest is but a weak factor in preventing unethical behavior. In summary, this study provides solid empirical evidence that university students are likely to use emotional influence tactics violating both the ethical codes of conduct and the formalized bureaucratic procedures of HE examination, particularly if they suffer from study-related burnout. However, the accelerating effect of burnout on bribery is conditional in that it only holds for darker shades of bribery. HE institutions may benefit from implementing the four-eye principle and from launching awareness campaigns that enable lecturers to better recognize these tactics and engage students in creating a transparent environment for testing, grading, and collaboration that is resistant to bribery.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristina S. Weißmüller & Lode Waele, 2022. "Would you Bribe your Lecturer? A Quasi-experimental Study on Burnout and Bribery in Higher Education," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 63(5), pages 768-796, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:63:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11162-021-09669-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11162-021-09669-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-021-09669-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11162-021-09669-1?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Landers, Richard N. & Behrend, Tara S., 2015. "An Inconvenient Truth: Arbitrary Distinctions Between Organizational, Mechanical Turk, and Other Convenience Samples," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 142-164, June.
    2. Vivi Alatas & Lisa Cameron & Ananish Chaudhuri & Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan, 2009. "Gender, Culture, and Corruption: Insights from an Experimental Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(3), pages 663-680, January.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Barbara Ritter, 2006. "Can Business Ethics be Trained? A Study of the Ethical Decision-making Process in Business Students," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 153-164, October.
    5. Vivi Alatas & Lisa Cameron & Ananish Chaudhuri & Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan, 2009. "Gender, Culture, and Corruption: Insights from an Experimental Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(3), pages 663-680, January.
    6. Sabic-El-Rayess, Amra & Mansur, Naheed Natasha, 2016. "Favor reciprocation theory in education: New corruption typology," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-32.
    7. Celia Moore, 2008. "Moral Disengagement in Processes of Organizational Corruption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 129-139, June.
    8. Michael Kremer, 2003. "Randomized Evaluations of Educational Programs in Developing Countries: Some Lessons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 102-106, May.
    9. Niki A. Nieuwenboer & Muel Kaptein, 2008. "Spiraling Down into Corruption: A Dynamic Analysis of the Social Identity Processes that Cause Corruption in Organizations to Grow," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(2), pages 133-146, December.
    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. Mingfeng Tang & Mei Mei & Cuiwen Li & Xingyang Lv & Xushuang Li & Lihao Wang, 2020. "How does an individual’s default behavior on an online peer-to-peer lending platform influence an observer’s default intention?," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. 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.
    3. Armand, Alex & Coutts, Alexander & Vicente, Pedro C. & Vilela, Inês, 2023. "Measuring corruption in the field using behavioral games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    4. Martin Eisend, 2019. "Morality Effects and Consumer Responses to Counterfeit and Pirated Products: A Meta-analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(2), pages 301-323, January.
    5. Fosgaard, Toke Reinholt & Hansen, Lars Gaarn & Piovesan, Marco, 2013. "Separating Will from Grace: An experiment on conformity and awareness in cheating," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 279-284.
    6. Ervin L. Black & F. Greg Burton & Joshua K. Cieslewicz, 2022. "Improving Ethics: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior to Include Moral Disengagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(4), pages 945-978, December.
    7. Abbink, Klaus & Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Gangadharan, Lata & Jain, Tarun, 2014. "Letting the briber go free: An experiment on mitigating harassment bribes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 17-28.
    8. Thomas Li-Ping Tang, 2016. "Theory of Monetary Intelligence: Money Attitudes—Religious Values, Making Money, Making Ethical Decisions, and Making the Grade," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 583-603, February.
    9. Eddy Ng & Ronald Burke, 2010. "Predictor of Business Students’ Attitudes Toward Sustainable Business Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(4), pages 603-615, September.
    10. Elisaveta Sardžoska & Thomas Tang, 2012. "Work-Related Behavioral Intentions in Macedonia: Coping Strategies, Work Environment, Love of Money, Job Satisfaction, and Demographic Variables," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 373-391, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Franziska Zuber, 2015. "Spread of Unethical Behavior in Organizations: A Dynamic Social Network Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 151-172, September.
    13. Olayinka Oyekola & Martha A. Omolo & Olapeju C. Ogunmokun, 2023. "Are majority-female-owned firms more susceptible to bribery solicitations?," Discussion Papers 2311, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    14. Patrizia Ordine & Giuseppe Rose & Pasquale Giacobbe, 2023. "The effect of female representation on political budget cycle and public expenditure: Evidence from Italian municipalities," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 97-145, March.
    15. Thomas Tang & Toto Sutarso, 2013. "Falling or Not Falling into Temptation? Multiple Faces of Temptation, Monetary Intelligence, and Unethical Intentions Across Gender," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(3), pages 529-552, September.
    16. Thomas Tang & Yuh-Jia Chen, 2008. "Intelligence Vs. Wisdom: The Love of Money, Machiavellianism, and Unethical Behavior across College Major and Gender," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(1), pages 1-26, September.
    17. Shanmugavel, Nagarajan & Balakrishnan, Janarthanan, 2023. "Influence of pro-environmental behaviour towards behavioural intention of electric vehicles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Paul Benjamin Lowry & Jun Zhang & Chuang Wang & Mikko Siponen, 2016. "Why Do Adults Engage in Cyberbullying on Social Media? An Integration of Online Disinhibition and Deindividuation Effects with the Social Structure and Social Learning Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 962-986, December.
    19. Alice Guerra & Tatyana Zhuravleva, 2022. "Do women always behave as corruption cleaners?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 173-192, April.
    20. Corinna Claus & Ekkehard A. Köhler & Tim Krieger, 2022. "Can Moral Reminders Curb Corruption? Evidence from an Online Classroom Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 9670, CESifo.

    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:spr:reihed:v:63:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11162-021-09669-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.