Committed (dis)honesty: A systematic meta-analytic review of the divergent effects of social commitment to individuals or honesty oaths on dishonest behavior.

IF 17.3 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Psychological bulletin Pub Date : 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1037/bul0000429
Janis H. Zickfeld, S. Karg, Sebastian S Engen, Ana Sofía Ramirez Gonzalez, John Michael, P. Mitkidis
{"title":"Committed (dis)honesty: A systematic meta-analytic review of the divergent effects of social commitment to individuals or honesty oaths on dishonest behavior.","authors":"Janis H. Zickfeld, S. Karg, Sebastian S Engen, Ana Sofía Ramirez Gonzalez, John Michael, P. Mitkidis","doi":"10.1037/bul0000429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People feel committed to other individuals, groups, organizations, or moral norms in many contexts of everyday life. Such social commitment can lead to positive outcomes, such as increased job satisfaction or relationship longevity; yet, there can also be detrimental effects to feeling committed. Recent high-profile cases of fraud or corruption in companies like Enron or Volkswagen are likely influenced by strong commitment to the organization or coworkers. Although social commitment might increase dishonest behavior, there is little systematic knowledge about when and how this may occur. In the present project, we reviewed 20,988 articles, focusing on studies that experimentally manipulated social commitment and measured dishonest behavior. We retained 445 effect sizes from 121 articles featuring a total of 91,683 participants across 33 countries. We found no evidence that social commitment increases or reduces dishonest behavior in general. Nonetheless, we did find evidence that the effect strongly depends on the target of the commitment. Feeling committed to other individuals or groups reduces honest behavior (g = -0.17 [-0.24, -0.11]), whereas feeling committed to honesty norms through honesty oaths or pledges increases honest behavior (g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36]). The analysis identified several moderating variables and detected some degree of publication bias across effects. Our findings highlight the diverging effects of different forms of social commitment on dishonest behavior and suggest a combination of the different forms of commitment could be a possible means to combat corruption and dishonest behavior in the organizational context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":17.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000429","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People feel committed to other individuals, groups, organizations, or moral norms in many contexts of everyday life. Such social commitment can lead to positive outcomes, such as increased job satisfaction or relationship longevity; yet, there can also be detrimental effects to feeling committed. Recent high-profile cases of fraud or corruption in companies like Enron or Volkswagen are likely influenced by strong commitment to the organization or coworkers. Although social commitment might increase dishonest behavior, there is little systematic knowledge about when and how this may occur. In the present project, we reviewed 20,988 articles, focusing on studies that experimentally manipulated social commitment and measured dishonest behavior. We retained 445 effect sizes from 121 articles featuring a total of 91,683 participants across 33 countries. We found no evidence that social commitment increases or reduces dishonest behavior in general. Nonetheless, we did find evidence that the effect strongly depends on the target of the commitment. Feeling committed to other individuals or groups reduces honest behavior (g = -0.17 [-0.24, -0.11]), whereas feeling committed to honesty norms through honesty oaths or pledges increases honest behavior (g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36]). The analysis identified several moderating variables and detected some degree of publication bias across effects. Our findings highlight the diverging effects of different forms of social commitment on dishonest behavior and suggest a combination of the different forms of commitment could be a possible means to combat corruption and dishonest behavior in the organizational context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
承诺(不)诚实:对个人的社会承诺或诚信誓言对不诚实行为的不同影响的系统性元分析回顾。
在日常生活的许多情况下,人们会对其他个人、团体、组织或道德规范产生承诺感。这种社会承诺可以带来积极的结果,如提高工作满意度或延长人际关系;然而,承诺感也可能带来不利影响。最近在安然或大众等公司发生的备受瞩目的欺诈或腐败案件,很可能是受到了对组织或同事的强烈承诺的影响。虽然社会承诺可能会增加不诚实行为,但对于这种情况何时以及如何发生,我们却知之甚少。在本项目中,我们查阅了 20988 篇文章,重点关注通过实验操纵社会承诺并测量不诚实行为的研究。我们从 121 篇文章中保留了 445 个效应大小,涉及 33 个国家的 91,683 名参与者。我们没有发现任何证据表明社会承诺会增加或减少一般的不诚实行为。不过,我们确实发现了证据,证明这种效应在很大程度上取决于承诺的目标。对其他个人或团体的承诺会减少不诚实行为(g = -0.17 [-0.24, -0.11]),而通过诚实宣誓或保证对诚实规范的承诺会增加不诚实行为(g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36])。分析发现了几个调节变量,并检测到不同效应之间存在一定程度的发表偏差。我们的研究结果凸显了不同形式的社会承诺对不诚实行为的不同影响,并表明将不同形式的承诺结合起来可能是在组织环境中打击腐败和不诚实行为的一种手段。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological bulletin
Psychological bulletin 医学-心理学
CiteScore
33.60
自引率
0.90%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Psychological Bulletin publishes syntheses of research in scientific psychology. Research syntheses seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses. A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments: -of the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest; -of critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research; -of important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information.
期刊最新文献
A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of 30 years of stress generation research: Clinical, psychological, and sociodemographic risk and protective factors for prospective negative life events. "All we have to fear is fear itself": Paradigms for reducing fear by preventing awareness of it. The unpleasantness of thinking: A meta-analytic review of the association between mental effort and negative affect. Age-related changes in emotion recognition across childhood: A meta-analytic review. Can sociocultural and contextual factors explain gender differences in sex drive? A response to Frankenbach et al. (2022).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1