How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior: A Role Congruity Approa
- PDF / 1,008,097 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 58 Downloads / 230 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior: A Role Congruity Approach Ke Michael Mai1 · Aleksander P. J. Ellis2 · David T. Welsh3 Received: 29 January 2018 / Accepted: 18 January 2019 © Springer Nature B.V. 2019
Abstract A significant body of research has emerged in order to better understand unethical behavior at work and how gender plays a role in the process. In this study, we look to add to this literature by exploring how perpetrator gender influences reactions to distinct types of unethicality. Rather than viewing unethical behavior as a unitary construct, where all forms of lying, cheating, and stealing are the same, we integrate theories and concepts from the criminal justice and moral psychology literatures to categorize certain unethical behaviors as either impulsive or premeditated. Given the agentic nature of premeditated unethical behavior, we draw from role congruity theory to predict that women will be punished more severely than men for their role incongruous actions. Impulsive unethical behavior, on the other hand, will be less likely to elicit perceptions of congruity or incongruity, leading to less of a gender effect. Results from three studies sampling both undergraduates and working adults in the United States, Singapore, and South Korea showed that participants were more likely to associate premeditated unethical behavior with a male perpetrator because it was seen as less feminine (Study 1), and female perpetrators who engaged in premeditated unethical behavior received more severe punishment than male perpetrators due to the perceived role incongruity of their actions (Study 2 and Study 3). Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research. Keywords Unethical behavior · Premeditation · Gender · Role congruence The mounting public scorn and media criticism surrounding notable business scandals has led to a call for more social scientific research in the field of behavioral ethics (Treviño 1986). In response, a growing body of empirical research has emerged in order to better understand the individual and contextual factors associated with unethical behavior * Ke Michael Mai [email protected] Aleksander P. J. Ellis [email protected] David T. Welsh [email protected] 1
NUS Business School, National University of Singapore, Mochtar Riady Building, BIZ1 8‑39, 15 Kent Ridge Drive, Singapore 119245, Singapore
2
The Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona, McClelland Hall, 405KK, Tucson, AZ 85721‑0108, USA
3
W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University, 300 E. Lemon St, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA
and its consequences at work (for review, O’Fallon and Butterfield 2005; Tenbrunsel and Smith-Crowe 2008; Treviño et al. 2006), defined as “any organizational member action that violates widely accepted (societal) moral norms” (KishGephart et al. 2010, p. 2). The role of gender in the domain of ethics has long been of interest to scholars (e.g., Ambrose
Data Loading...
