IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/accted/v29y2020i3p291-304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cross-cultural comparison of ethical reasoning of students in China and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Trish Driskill
  • Robert Rankin

Abstract

As China advances, attitudes about ethical reasoning will continue to evolve from norms rooted in Confucianism, guanxi, and collectivism toward attitudes consistent with developed countries. With the lack of understanding of reasoning in China, business executives, professors, and students from developed countries rely on their society’s cultural norms to inform ethical reasoning. The purpose of this study was to examine cross-cultural ethical reasoning skills of the next generation of executives in the United States and China represented by students from mid-sized universities. Using the Accounting Ethical Dilemma Instrument [Thorne, 2000. The development of two measures to assess accountants’ prescriptive and deliberative moral reasoning. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 12, 139–169. https://aaajournals.org/loi/bria] and Hofstede’s [1991. Cultures and organizations. McGraw-Hill] taxonomy of cultural identities, the researchers determined that students from a public university in the United States exhibited higher reasoning skills than their Chinese peers. With the potential evolution of ethical reasoning in China, findings from this study may prove beneficial in the future of the convergence of Chinese and Western cultures.

Suggested Citation

  • Trish Driskill & Robert Rankin, 2020. "Cross-cultural comparison of ethical reasoning of students in China and the United States," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 291-304, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:accted:v:29:y:2020:i:3:p:291-304
    DOI: 10.1080/09639284.2020.1760114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09639284.2020.1760114
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09639284.2020.1760114?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Snead, Ken C. & Kraft, Margo J. & Lozada, Aida R. & McGrath, Richard N. & Biswas, Tania & Zhou, Fuzhao, 2023. "An Application of Judgement Modeling to Examine Inter-Cultural Differences Regarding Perceptions of Business Skill Importance," MPRA Paper 120040, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Jan 2024.
    2. Alina Beattrice VLADU & Dan Dacian CUZDRIOREAN, 2022. "Considerations on the Improvement of Ethical Decision Making in the Accounting Profession," CECCAR Business Review, Body of Expert and Licensed Accountants of Romania (CECCAR), vol. 3(1), pages 44-52, January.
    3. Tamara Poje & Maja Zaman Groff, 2022. "Mapping Ethics Education in Accounting Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(2), pages 451-472, August.
    4. Peter E. Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2022. "Vignette Themes and Moral Reasoning in Business Contexts: The Case for the Defining Issues Test," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(4), pages 979-995, December.
    5. Apostolou, Barbara & Dorminey, Jack W. & Hassell, John M., 2021. "Accounting education literature review (2020)," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).

    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:taf:accted:v:29:y:2020:i:3:p:291-304. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAED20 .

    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.