Ethical dissonance, justifications, and moral behavior

doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.08.001

Current Opinion in Psychology

Volume 6, December 2015, Pages 157-161

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.08.001 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
Ethical dissonance represents the tension between moral-self and unethical behavior.
•
Justifications reduce ethical dissonance, allowing to do wrong and feel moral.
•
Ethical dissonance can be anticipated before, or experienced after, the violation.
•
Effective moral interventions can harness ethical dissonance as a moral gate-keeper.

Ethical dissonance is triggered by the inconsistency between the aspiration to uphold a moral self-image and the temptation to benefit from unethical behavior. In terms of a temporal distinction anticipated dissonance occurs before people commit a moral-violation. In contrast, experienced dissonance occurs after people realize they have violated their moral code. We review the psychological mechanisms and justifications people use to reduce ethical dissonance in order to benefit from wrongdoing and still feel moral. We then offer harnessing anticipated-dissonance to help people resist temptation, and utilize experienced-dissonance to prompt moral compensation and atonement. We argue that rather than viewing ethical dissonance as a threat to self-image, we should help people see it as the gate-keeper of their morality.

Section snippets

Ethical dissonance

Ethical dissonance arises from the inconsistency between the aspiration to uphold a moral self-image and the temptation to profit from unethical behavior. This dissonance is singled out for three reasons. First, ethical dissonance involves the breach of absolute criteria of right and wrong (e.g. the Ten Commandments; Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics). Second, beyond cognitive inconsistency, ethical dissonance poses a larger threat to the self, by including also the violation of social norms and

Reducing anticipated ethical dissonance

When anticipated ethical dissonance arises, people use pre-violation justifications to redefine unethical behaviors as ‘non’ violations. Ambiguity and gray areas allow people to blur the difference between right and wrong, and diminish the threat to the moral-self [8^••].

Cash substitutions. Taking money from the petty cash is stealing, but what about taking home office supplies? When a six-pack of Coca-Cola was left in a communal refrigerator on a university campus, the cans disappeared within 72

Reducing experienced ethical dissonance

When people experience ethical dissonance after their wrongdoing, they use post-violation justifications to compensate for their guilt and reestablish their moral self [8^••].

Cleansing. One way to relieve guilt involves self-punishment and physical pain [31]. Similar to religious rituals (e.g. fasting, abstinence, or flagellation) studies indicate that participants responded to their own moral violation with a tendency to self-inflict pain [32]. In several studies, guilt associated with

The promise of ethical dissonance

On a brighter note, ethical dissonance holds a promise. A robust finding indicates that people wish to be moral and consider honesty central to their self-image [44]. Serving as a moral gate-keeper, ethical dissonance harnesses the tension it creates to help people uphold their aspired moral standards. Research has documented effective ways to trigger ethical dissonance as an intervention [45]. For example, recalling the Ten Commandments or signing an honor code made morality salient and

Conflict of interest

None declared.

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:

• of special interest
•• of outstanding interest

First page preview

Click to open first page preview

View PDF

References (53)

J.I. Conrads et al.
Lying and team incentives
J Econ Psychol
(2013)
F. Gino et al.
Robin Hood under the hood: wealth-based discrimination in illicit customer help
Organ Sci
(2010)
N. Mazar et al.
Do green products make us better people?
Psychol Sci
(2010)
R.M. Nelissen
Guilt-induced self-punishment as a sign of remorse
Soc Psychol Pers Sci
(2012)
S. Ayal et al.
Honest rationales for dishonest behavior
D. Welsh et al.
The slippery slope: a self-regulatory examination of the cumulative effect of minor ethical transgressions
J Appl Psychol
(2015)
B.M. DePaulo et al.
Everyday lies in close and casual relationships
J Pers Soc Psychol
(1998)
M.H. Bazerman et al.
Blind Spots: Why We Fail To Do What's Right and What To Do About It
(2011)
D. Ariely
The Honest Truth About Dishonesty
(2012)
N. Mazar et al.
The dishonesty of honest people: a theory of self-concept maintenance
J Market Res
(2008)

R. Barkan et al.

The pot calling the kettle black: distancing response to ethical dissonance

J Exp Psychol Gen

(2012)

L. Festinger

A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance

(1962)

R.A. Wicklund et al.

Perspectives on Cognitive Dissonance

(2013)

S. Shalvi et al.

Self-serving justifications: doing wrong and feeling moral

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

(2015)

S. Shalvi et al.

Ethical maneuvering: why people avoid both major and minor lies

Br J Manage

(2011)

U. Fischbacher et al.

Lies in disguise — an experimental study on cheating

J Eur Econ Assoc

(2013)

B.E. Hilbig et al.

What lies beneath: how the distance between truth and lie drives dishonesty

J Exp Soc Psychol

(2013)

M.E. Schweitzer et al.

Stretching the truth: elastic justification and motivated communication of uncertain information

J Risk Uncertainty

(2002)

S. Erat et al.

White lies

Manage Sci

(2012)

U. Gneezy

Deception: the role of consequences

Am Econ Rev

(2005)

F. Gino et al.

Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others

J Econ Behav Organ

(2013)

L.L. Shu et al.

Sweeping dishonesty under the rug: How unethical actions lead to forgetting of moral rules

J Pers Soc Psychol

(2012)

S. Shalvi et al.

Oxytocin promotes group-serving dishonesty

Proc Natl Acad Sci

(2014)

R.A. Bethlehem et al.

The oxytocin paradox

Front Behav Neurosci

(2014)

B. Monin et al.

Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice

J Pers Soc Psychol

(2001)

S. Sachdeva et al.

Sinning saints and saintly sinners the paradox of moral self-regulation

Psychol Sci

(2009)

Cited by (111)

How pledges reduce dishonesty: The role of involvement and identification
2024, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Authorities and managers often rely on individuals and businesses' self-reports and employ various forms of honesty declarations to ensure that those individuals and businesses do not over-claim payments, benefits, or other resources. While previous work has found that honesty pledges have the potential to decrease dishonesty, effects have been mixed. We argue that understanding and predicting when honesty pledges are effective has been obstructed due to variations in experimental designs and operationalizations of honesty pledges in previous research. Specifically, we focus on the role of whether and how an ex-ante honesty pledge asks individuals to identify (by ID, name, initials) and how much involvement the pledge requires from the individual (low: just reading vs. high: re-typing the text of the pledge). In four pre-registered online studies (N > 5000), we systematically examine these two dimensions of a pledge to find that involvement is often more effective than identification. In addition, low involvement pledges, without any identification, are mostly ineffective. Finally, we find that the effect of a high (vs. low) involvement pledge is relatively more persistent across tasks. Yet, repeating a low involvement pledge across tasks increases its effectiveness and compensates for the lower persistency across tasks. Taken together, these results contribute both to theory by comparing some of the mechanisms possibly underlying honesty pledges as well as to practice by providing guidance to managers and policymakers on how to effectively design pledges to prevent or reduce dishonesty in self-reports.
Moral disengagement in the media discourses on meat and dairy production systems
2024, Appetite
Meat and dairy production and consumption are the subject of ongoing public debates that touch on various sustainability issues such as biodiversity loss, climate change, animal welfare, and social and health aspects. Despite extensive discussions specifically relating to the environmental impacts of livestock farming in conjunction with animal welfare aspects, there have been no substantial changes in production or consumption patterns. Moreover, the focus of extant research is usually on consumers' responses to public concerns around livestock production. In this study, we shed light on the discrepancy between the normative discourse and action of relevant value chain actors with the help of Bandura's theory of moral disengagement, which allows us to identify mechanisms that contribute to the perpetuation of unsustainable production and consumption patterns. In particular, we focus on the shifting of responsibility between actors in the normatively charged field of sustainable livestock production. We collected 109 media interviews on meat and dairy production and consumption from the years 2020–2022, including interviews with actors from agriculture, processing industries, and food retail. Using qualitative content analysis, we investigated the role of moral disengagement in the media discourse on meat and dairy production and explored differences between actors in terms of moral disengagement. We found that shifting of responsibility shows a quasi-circular dynamic of being shifted from all actors to all, in our case most frequently to consumers, politics, and (diffuse) economic forces. In addition, our analysis showed the use of social justifications, beneficial comparisons, and euphemistic labelling to be common mechanisms of moral disengagement, constituting a collective problem within agri-food systems.
Giving farm animals a name and a face: Eliciting animal advocacy among omnivores using the identifiable victim effect
2024, Journal of Environmental Psychology
Diets based on animal products are costly to our health and the planet and often inflict suffering on animals. In this study, we aimed to elicit animal advocacy among omnivores using the identifiable victim effect, a well-documented phenomenon in which presenting an identifiable victim, compared to anonymous or statistical victims, evokes greater caring and helping behavior. We explored whether this finding extends to farm animal victims, and particularly among omnivores who may have a material interest in the outcome (i.e., the slaughter of farm animals)., Consequently, due to their dietary lifestyle and consumer support of the meat industry, they may be perceived as complicit in the victimization. In Experiment 1, omnivore participants indicated a greater likelihood to sign and share a petition to save an identified runaway calf (presented with a name and a picture) from slaughter than several unidentified runaway calves. In Experiment 2, we extended these findings to actual petition signing, along with reporting support of the petition. In Experiment 3, we further replicated the identifiability effect using real donations to save the runaway calf (calves) from slaughter and demonstrated it is limited to a single-identified victim. Additionally, we found that feelings of sympathy (Experiment 1) and ambivalence towards meat (Experiment 3) mediated the effect, whereas concern, empathy, identification with animals (Experiment 2), and ecological identity (Experiment 3) moderated it. Omnivores who scored high in concern and ecological identity, and low in empathy and identification with animals were more susceptible to the effect. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Price-ethicality association: When price discounts inhibit ethical purchasing
2023, Journal of Business Research
The authors demonstrate that consumers form a robust association between price and ethicality, separate from the traditional price-quality association, which significantly influences their ethical purchase decisions. Grounded in compensatory inference theory and signaling theory, six studies reveal that when consumers encounter ethical products offered at discount prices, they perceive that the products cannot be genuinely ethical and avoid purchasing them. The adverse effect of discount prices on ethical consumption is explained by lower product ethicality perceptions and is prevalent among those who are more ethically minded. The final study shows that marketers can overcome the negative effects by including communications assuring consumers that the products are legitimately ethical, despite price discounts.
On the interplay between pain observation, guilt and shame proneness and honesty
2023, Acta Psychologica
Seeing others in pain can stimulate powerful socio-emotional responses. Does it also make us more moral? In two laboratory experiments, we examined the interplay between pain observation, self-reported guilt and shame, subjective perceptions of pain intensity, and subsequent honest behavior. Watching a confederate perform a moderately painful (vs. non-painful) task did not affect honest behavior in a subsequent die-roll task. Independent of pain observation, there was a positive relationship between self-reported guilt proneness and shame proneness and honesty. More specifically, individuals who are more prone to feeling guilt -and to a lesser extent shame- behaved more honestly. Furthermore, we found weak support for the hypothesis that greater perceived pain (rather than objective pain) is associated with less cheating. We call for further research in the interconnections between perceived pain, guilt, shame, and moral behavior.
What you think is a joke is actually cyberbullying: The effects of ethical dissonance, event judgment and humor style on cyberbullying behavior
2023, Computers in Human Behavior
This study examines the roles that gender, family economics, ethical dissonance, event judgment, and humor style play in cyberbullying. This cross-sectional study was conducted through an online survey, and 360 Chinese college students participated. The results show that boys have more cyberbullying (flaming) experience than girls and are more likely to use aggressive humor in daily life; girls feel more ethical dissonance than boys in denigration events, are more likely to correctly judge this as bullying, and more often use self-enhancing humor. Students from well-off families are more likely to use affiliative humor than students from moderate and disadvantaged financial situations; students from moderate and well-off families are more likely to correctly identify denigration as bullying behavior than students from economically disadvantaged families; and students from economically disadvantaged families perceive a higher level of ethical dissonance in flaming events. In addition, the variables were correlated with each other to a certain extent and significantly jointly predicted the three types of cyberbullying behaviors; event judgment and aggressive humor were the common predictors.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Ethical dissonance, justifications, and moral behavior

Highlights

Section snippets

Ethical dissonance

Reducing anticipated ethical dissonance

Reducing experienced ethical dissonance

The promise of ethical dissonance

Conflict of interest

References and recommended reading

First page preview

J Econ Psychol

Organ Sci

Psychol Sci

Soc Psychol Pers Sci

J Appl Psychol

Everyday lies in close and casual relationships

J Pers Soc Psychol

Blind Spots: Why We Fail To Do What's Right and What To Do About It

The Honest Truth About Dishonesty

The dishonesty of honest people: a theory of self-concept maintenance

J Market Res

The pot calling the kettle black: distancing response to ethical dissonance

J Exp Psychol Gen

A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance

Perspectives on Cognitive Dissonance

Self-serving justifications: doing wrong and feeling moral

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

Ethical maneuvering: why people avoid both major and minor lies

Br J Manage

Lies in disguise — an experimental study on cheating

J Eur Econ Assoc

What lies beneath: how the distance between truth and lie drives dishonesty

J Exp Soc Psychol

Stretching the truth: elastic justification and motivated communication of uncertain information

J Risk Uncertainty

White lies

Manage Sci

Deception: the role of consequences

Am Econ Rev

Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others

J Econ Behav Organ

Sweeping dishonesty under the rug: How unethical actions lead to forgetting of moral rules

J Pers Soc Psychol

Oxytocin promotes group-serving dishonesty

Proc Natl Acad Sci

The oxytocin paradox

Front Behav Neurosci

Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice

J Pers Soc Psychol

Sinning saints and saintly sinners the paradox of moral self-regulation

Psychol Sci