Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10071/24581 |
Resumo: | Power has long been associated with corruption, yet most evidence has been linked to abuses for gains (money, resources, sex). In this article, we propose a conceptual framework that considers unethical conduct to obtain gains and to avoid losses. Following the situated focus theory of power (Guinote, 2007), we propose that power flexibly orients individuals’ cognitions and efforts in line with active goals. Under a gains frame, compared to the powerless, the powerful should be more motivated to obtain gains and cheat more, in order to protect these gains. Under a loss frame, the powerful should experience a temporary activation of loss aversion goals, while the powerless should experience a chronic activation of loss aversion goals. Consequently, power differences in corruption levels should only occur for gains and not when losses are at stake. The effects of power and frame were demonstrated in one study (N = 321). The findings provided initial evidence supporting the notion that an understanding of the effects of power on corruption necessitates a consideration of contextual framing. |
id |
RCAP_46a62ab45f8d6d31bc775abe6b8129ec |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/24581 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behaviorSocial powerFramingDishonestyGoal-attainmentLoss aversionPower has long been associated with corruption, yet most evidence has been linked to abuses for gains (money, resources, sex). In this article, we propose a conceptual framework that considers unethical conduct to obtain gains and to avoid losses. Following the situated focus theory of power (Guinote, 2007), we propose that power flexibly orients individuals’ cognitions and efforts in line with active goals. Under a gains frame, compared to the powerless, the powerful should be more motivated to obtain gains and cheat more, in order to protect these gains. Under a loss frame, the powerful should experience a temporary activation of loss aversion goals, while the powerless should experience a chronic activation of loss aversion goals. Consequently, power differences in corruption levels should only occur for gains and not when losses are at stake. The effects of power and frame were demonstrated in one study (N = 321). The findings provided initial evidence supporting the notion that an understanding of the effects of power on corruption necessitates a consideration of contextual framing.Wiley-Blackwell2022-12-28T00:00:00Z2022-01-01T00:00:00Z20222022-04-08T15:51:12Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10071/24581eng0021-902910.1111/jasp.12852Guinote, A.Kim, K-Hinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-09T17:38:37Zoai:repositorio.iscte-iul.pt:10071/24581Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T22:17:41.867245Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
title |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
spellingShingle |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior Guinote, A. Social power Framing Dishonesty Goal-attainment Loss aversion |
title_short |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
title_full |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
title_fullStr |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
title_full_unstemmed |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
title_sort |
Cheating to win or not to lose: Power and situational framing affect unethical behavior |
author |
Guinote, A. |
author_facet |
Guinote, A. Kim, K-H |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Kim, K-H |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Guinote, A. Kim, K-H |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Social power Framing Dishonesty Goal-attainment Loss aversion |
topic |
Social power Framing Dishonesty Goal-attainment Loss aversion |
description |
Power has long been associated with corruption, yet most evidence has been linked to abuses for gains (money, resources, sex). In this article, we propose a conceptual framework that considers unethical conduct to obtain gains and to avoid losses. Following the situated focus theory of power (Guinote, 2007), we propose that power flexibly orients individuals’ cognitions and efforts in line with active goals. Under a gains frame, compared to the powerless, the powerful should be more motivated to obtain gains and cheat more, in order to protect these gains. Under a loss frame, the powerful should experience a temporary activation of loss aversion goals, while the powerless should experience a chronic activation of loss aversion goals. Consequently, power differences in corruption levels should only occur for gains and not when losses are at stake. The effects of power and frame were demonstrated in one study (N = 321). The findings provided initial evidence supporting the notion that an understanding of the effects of power on corruption necessitates a consideration of contextual framing. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-12-28T00:00:00Z 2022-01-01T00:00:00Z 2022 2022-04-08T15:51:12Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/24581 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10071/24581 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
0021-9029 10.1111/jasp.12852 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley-Blackwell |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley-Blackwell |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799134735399649280 |