PSYCHOLOGICAL CONTEXTS OF THE STUDY OF CORRUPTION IN FOREIGN STUDIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/psy-visnyk/2023.1.8Keywords:
corruption, corrupt behaviour, power, tendency to corruption, personal benefit, risk acceptance, rationalizationAbstract
The purpose of the work was to determine the theoretical and methodological approaches available in foreign scientific studies to the identification of psychological factors of corrupt behaviour, in particular, the angles of studying the interdependence between the presence of power and the individual’s propensity to corrupt acts. Using the created list of search terms, works published in the fields of psychology, sociology, political science, economics, and law were selected from the specified issues. The analysis of research from the point of view of the contexts most often used in the study of corrupt behaviour showed, that the existing literature most often examines such problems as the influence of power on an individual’s propensity to corruption, issues of personal gain and self-control, loss aversion and risk acceptance, rationalization and emotions. The theory of rational choice explains corruption as a function of calculated, strategic, selfinterested behaviour. From this point of view, corruption is especially likely in situations of power asymmetry, when some individuals have power over others. The hypothesis of most of the analyzed studies can be the assumption that persons in power are more inclined to act corruptly. That is, the presence of power becomes one of the main points in understanding individual decisions regarding corruption. Power can lead to overconfidence, greater risk-taking, and a focus on rewards. People’s overconfidence in their own morality can prevent them from realizing or admitting that they are acting corruptly. Corrupt actions can arise as a result of previous actions that were not considered unethical or were in an ethical gray area. Researchers show that people are willing to engage in serious corruption without resorting to moderate corruption. A field experiment on lying has shown that people are extremely willing to deceive (lie) for personal gain. The genderpsychological explanation of corruption is objectionable.
References
Arkin, R.M., A.J. Appelman, and J.M. Burger. (1980). “Social Anxiety, SelfPresentation, and the Self-Serving Bias in Causal Attribution”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1): 23–35.
Ashforth, B.E., and V. Anand. (2003). “The Normalization of Corruption in Organizations”. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25: 1-52.
Bardhan, P. (1997). “Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues”. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(3): 1320–1346.
Bazelman, M.H., and O. Sezer. (2016). “Bounded Awareness: Implications for Ethical Decision-Making”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136: 95–105.
Benson, M. (2015). “White Collar Crime: Recent Trends and Debates”. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Volume 25, pp. 551–557. U4 ISSUE 2018:2 16
Berninghaus, S.K., et al. (2013). “Risk Attitude, Beliefs, and Information in a Corruption Game – An Experimental Analysis”. Journal of Economic Psychology, 34: 46–60.
Bicchieri, C., and D. Ganegonda. (2016). “Determinants of Corruption: A SocioPsychological Analysis”. In P. Nichols and D. Robertson (eds.), Thinking About Bribery: Neuroscience, Moral Cognition and the Psychology of Bribery. Cambridge University Press.
Camargo, C.B. (2017). “Can a Behavioural Approach Help Fight Corruption?” Basel Institute on Governance, Policy Brief Number 1.
Campbell, J.L., and A.S. Göritz. (2013). “Culture Corrupts! A Qualitative Study of Organizational Culture in Corrupt Organizations”. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(3): 291–311.
Choo, F., and K. Tan. (2007). “An ‘American Dream’ Theory of Corporate Executive Fraud”. Accounting Forum, 31: 203–215.
Darley, J.M. (2005). “The Cognitive and Social Psychology of Contagious Organizational Corruption”. Brooklyn Law Review, 70(4): 1177–1194.
Dimant, E. (2015). “The Nature of Corruption: An Interdisciplinary Perspective”. Economics Discussion Papers, 2013(59): 2–61.
Dimant, E., and G. Tosato. (2017). “Causes and Effects of Corruption: What Has Past Decade’s Empirical Research Taught Us? A Survey. Journal of Economic Surveys.
Djawadi, B.M., and R. Fahr. (2015). “…and the are really lying’: Clean Evidence on the Pervasiveness of Cheating in Professional Contexts From a Field Experiment”. Journal of Economic Psychology: 48: 48–59.
Fast, N., et al. (2012). “Power and Overconfident DecisionMaking”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117: 249–260.
Guerrero, M.A., and E. Rodríguez-Oreggia. (2008). “On the Individual Decisions to Commit Corruption: A Methodological Complement”. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 65: 357–372.
Heywood, P. (2017). “Rethinking Corruption: Hocus-pocus, Locus and Focus”. Slavonic and East European Review. Vol. 95. No. 1.
Hoffmann, L.K., and R.N. Patel. (2017). “Collective Action on Corruption in Nigeria: A Social Norms Approach to Connecting Society and Institutions”. London: Chatham House Report.
Jacquemet, N., J.L. Rullière, and I.Vialle. (2008). “Monitoring Optimistic Agents”. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29: 698–714.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Penguin Books.
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk”. Econometrica, 47(2): 263–292.
Kipnis, D. (1972). “Does Power Corrupt?” Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 24(1): 33–41.
Klitgaard, R. (1988). Controlling Corruption. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Klitgaard, R. (1998). “International Cooperation Against Corruption”. Finance & Development, 35(1): 3–6.
Kоbis, N., et al. (2015). “‘Who Doesn’t?’ The Impact of Descriptive Norms on Corruption”. PLoS One, 10(6): 1–14.
Köbis, N., et al. (2016). “Prospection in Individual and Interpersonal Corruption Dilemmas”. Review of General Psychology, 20(1): 71–85.
Köbis, N., et al. (2017). “The Road to Bribery and Corruption: Slippery Slope or Steep Cliff?” Psychological Science, 28(3): 297–306.
Manzetti, L., and C.J. Wilson. (2007). “Why Do Corrupt Governments Maintain Public Support?” Comparative Political Studies, 40(8): 949–970.
Marquette, H., and C. Peiffer. (2015). “Corruption and Collective Action”. Developmental Leadership Programme Research Paper. University of Birmingham.
Menocal, A.R., et al. (2015). “Why Corruption Matters: Understanding Causes, Effects, and How to Measure Them. Evidence Paper on Corruption”. London: Department for International Development.
Nye, J. (1967). “Corruption and Political Development: A Cost-Benefit Analysis”. American Political Science Review, 61(2): 417–427.
Persson, A., B. Rothstein, and J. Teorell. (2013). “Why Anticorruption Reforms Fail – Systemic Corruption as a Collective Action Problem”. Governance, 26(3): 449–471.
Prentice, R.A. (2007). “Ethical Decision Making: More Needed Than Good Intentions”. Financial Analysts Journal, 63(6): 17–30.
Prescott, R.E. (2012). Applying Prospect Theory to Moral Decision-Making: The Heuristic Biases of Moral Decision-Making Under Risk. PhD Dissertation. Minneapolis, MN: Walden University.
Reckers, P., and M. Samuelson. (2016). “Toward Resolving the Debate Surrounding Slippery Slope Versus Licensing Behavior: The Importance of Individual Differences in Accounting Ethical Decision Making”. Advances in Accounting, Incorporating Advances in International Accounting, 34: 1–16.
Rose-Ackerman, S and B.J. Palifka. (2016). Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences and Reform. 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge and New York (NY).
Rusch, J. (2016). “The Social Psychology of Corruption”. Paper presented at the 2016 OECD Integrity Forum. Sappington, D.E.M. (1991). “Incentives in Principal-Agent Relationships”. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. Vol. 5. No. 2.
Sоreide, T. (2009). “Too Risk Averse to Stay Honest? Business Corruption, Uncertainty and Attitudes Toward Risk”. International Review of Law and Economics, 29: 388–395.
Tepper, B.J. (2010). “When Managers Pressure Employees to Behave Badly: Toward a Comprehensive Response”. Business Horizons, 53: 591–598.
Trevino, L.K., and S.A. Youngblood. (1990). “Bad Apples in Bad Barrels: A Causal Analysis of Ethical Decision-Making Behavior”. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(4): 378–386.
Wang, F., and X. Sun. (2016). “Absolute Power Leads to Absolute Corruption? Impact of Power on Corruption Depending on the Concepts of Power One Holds”. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46: 77–89.
Weisel, O., and and S. Shalvi. (2015) ‘The collaborative roots of corruption’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(34): 10651–10656.
Yap, A.J. (2013). How Power and Powerlessness Corrupt. PhD Dissertation. New York: Columbia University.
Zaloznaya, M. (2017). “The Social Psychology of Corruption: Why It Does Not Exist and Why It Should”. Sociology Compass, 8(2): 187–202.
