IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v15y2005i03p363-383_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimental Evidence Relating to the Person-Situation Interactionist Model of Ethical Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Church, Bryan
  • Gaa, James C.
  • Khalid Nainar, S. M.
  • Shehata, Mohamed M.

Abstract

According to a widely credited model in the business ethics literature, ethical decisions are a function of two kinds of factors, personal (individual) and situational, and these factors interact with each other. According to a contrary view of decision making that is widely held in some areas of business research, individuals’ decisions about ethical issues (and subsequent actions) are purely a function of their self-interest. The laboratory experiment reported in this paper provides a test of the person-situation interactionist model, using the general theoretical and experimental framework used in the experimental economics literature. One individual and two situational factors relating to moral intensity were examined which may influence decisions to misrepresent information in the course of business activities. The individual and one situational variable were significantly related to participants’ actions. The interactions among individual and situation variables were not individually significant, although the model including interactions had a much higher level of statistical significance. Gender was significant, both directly and in interaction with moral development, suggesting that it may be worthy of further examination.

Suggested Citation

  • Church, Bryan & Gaa, James C. & Khalid Nainar, S. M. & Shehata, Mohamed M., 2005. "Experimental Evidence Relating to the Person-Situation Interactionist Model of Ethical Decision Making," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 363-383, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:15:y:2005:i:03:p:363-383_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00010654/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wayne Decker & Thomas Calo, 2007. "Observers’ Impressions of Unethical Persons and Whistleblowers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 309-318, December.
    2. Connie Bateman & Sean Valentine, 2010. "Investigating the Effects of Gender on Consumers’ Moral Philosophies and Ethical Intentions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(3), pages 393-414, September.
    3. Cormac Bryce & Thorsten Chmura & Rob Webb & Joel Stiebale & Carly Cheevers, 2019. "Internally Reporting Risk in Financial Services: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(2), pages 493-512, May.
    4. A. Oumlil & Joseph Balloun, 2009. "Ethical Decision-Making Differences Between American and Moroccan Managers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 457-478, February.
    5. Luca Casali, Gian & Perano, Mirko, 2021. "Forty years of research on factors influencing ethical decision making: Establishing a future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 614-630.
    6. Jana Craft, 2013. "A Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 2004–2011," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(2), pages 221-259, October.
    7. Dilek Zamantılı Nayır & Michael T. Rehg & Yurdanur Asa, 2018. "Influence of Ethical Position on Whistleblowing Behaviour: Do Preferred Channels in Private and Public Sectors Differ?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 147-167, April.
    8. Kanagaretnam, Kiridaran & Mestelman, Stuart & Nainar, S.M. Khalid & Shehata, Mohamed, 2010. "Trust and reciprocity with transparency and repeated interactions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 241-247, March.
    9. Kevin Clark & Narda Quigley & Stephen Stumpf, 2014. "The Influence of Decision Frames and Vision Priming on Decision Outcomes in Work Groups: Motivating Stakeholder Considerations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 27-38, March.
    10. Stephen V. Burks & Erin L. Krupka, 2012. "A Multimethod Approach to Identifying Norms and Normative Expectations Within a Corporate Hierarchy: Evidence from the Financial Services Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 203-217, January.
    11. Katrina Graham & Jonathan Ziegert & Johnna Capitano, 2015. "The Effect of Leadership Style, Framing, and Promotion Regulatory Focus on Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 423-436, February.
    12. Katrin Hummel & Dieter Pfaff & Katja Rost, 2018. "Does Economics and Business Education Wash Away Moral Judgment Competence?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 559-577, June.

    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:cup:buetqu:v:15:y:2005:i:03:p:363-383_01. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    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.