The Road to Bribery and Corruption

Impacts of Unethical Behavior on Self-Esteem: A Contingent Dual-Process Model

Previous studies have reported mixed findings on how and why unethical behavior affects self-esteem. To address this issue, a contingent dual-process model is proposed and tested. The model postulates a negative impact of unethical behavior on self-esteem through decreased morality, a positive effect through increased competence, and the relative strength of these two paths depending on system-justifying motives. Studies using unethical behavior for self-interest (Studies 1 and 2), involving ingroup interest (Study 3), and measuring (Studies 1 and 3) and manipulating general system justification (Study 2) provide support for the model. By identifying the effects of system-justifying motives and linking the two competing paths, the model reconciles inconsistencies in previous research regarding how self-esteem is influenced by unethical behavior and reveals the underlying mechanism of this association. Accordingly, the current research constructs a motivational and superordinate framework to clarify the dynamic consequences of unethical behavior.

Why people engage in corrupt collaboration: an observation at the multi-brain level

Recent studies suggest that corrupt collaboration (i.e. acquiring private benefits with joint immoral acts) represents a dilemma between the honesty and reciprocity norms. In this study, we asked pairs of participants (labeled as A and B) to individually toss a coin and report their outcomes; their collective benefit could be maximized by dishonestly reporting (a corrupt behavior). As expected, the likelihood of corrupt behavior was high; this probability was negatively correlated with player A's moral judgment ability but positively correlated with player B's empathic concern (EC). Functional near-infrared spectroscopy data revealed that the brain-to-brain synchronization in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was associated with fewer corrupt behaviors, and that it mediated the relationship between player A's moral judgment ability and corrupt collaboration. Meanwhile, the right temporal-parietal junction synchronization was associated with more corrupt behaviors, and that it mediated the relationship between player B's EC and corrupt collaboration. The roles of these 2 regions are interpreted according to the influence of the honesty and reciprocity norms on corrupt collaboration. In our opinion, these findings provide insight into the underlying mechanisms and modulating factors of corrupt collaboration.

Conditional bribery: Insights from incentivized experiments across 18 nations

Bribery, a grand global challenge, often occurs across national jurisdictions. Behavioral research studying bribery to inform anticorruption interventions, however, has merely examined bribery within single nations. Here, we report online experiments and provide insights into crossnational bribery. We ran a pilot study (across three nations) and a large, incentivized experiment using a bribery game played across 18 nations (N = 5,582, total number of incentivized decisions = 346,084). The results show that people offer disproportionally more bribes to interaction partners from nations with a high (vs. low) reputation for foreign bribery, measured by macrolevel indicators of corruption perceptions. People widely share nation-specific expectations about a nation's bribery acceptance levels. However, these nation-specific expectations negatively correlate with actual bribe acceptance levels, suggesting shared yet inaccurate stereotypes about bribery tendencies. Moreover, the interaction partner's national background (more than one's own national background) drives people's decision to offer or accept a bribe-a finding we label conditional bribery.

Role of Guanxi (interpersonal relationship) in bribe-taking behaviors: evidence from China

Bribery, an illegal conspiracy between two transactional parties, has a wide range of destructive effects on society. From an interpersonal interaction perspective, we explored how Guanxi (interpersonal relationships, including direct and indirect ones) influences individuals, especially government officials' bribe-taking probability, using behavioral experiments and questionnaires. The findings suggested that direct Guanxi promoted individuals' acceptance of bribes (Study 1a), and indirect Guanxi had the same role and effect sizes (Study 1b). However, the mechanisms were slightly different. Government officials were more likely to accept bribes from family members and friends (direct Guanxi) (than strangers) because they had more trust and felt more responsible and obligated to help them (Study 2). However, accepting bribes from those who contacted them through their family or friends (indirect Guanxi) (vs. strangers) was only driven by trust (Study 3). The present study explores the lubricant role of Guanxi in corruption, extends the literature on why bribery occurs from a new perspective, and provides suggestions for fighting corruption.

Corrupt third parties undermine trust and prosocial behaviour between people

Corruption is a pervasive phenomenon that affects the quality of institutions, undermines economic growth and exacerbates inequalities around the globe. Here we tested whether perceiving representatives of institutions as corrupt undermines trust and subsequent prosocial behaviour among strangers. We developed an experimental game paradigm modelling representatives as third-party punishers to manipulate or assess corruption and examine its relationship with trust and prosociality (trust behaviour, cooperation and generosity). In a sequential dyadic die-rolling task, the participants observed the dishonest behaviour of a target who would subsequently serve as a third-party punisher in a trust game (Study 1a, N = 540), in a prisoner's dilemma (Study 1b, N = 503) and in dictator games (Studies 2-4, N = 765, pre-registered). Across these five studies, perceiving a third party as corrupt undermined interpersonal trust and, in turn, prosocial behaviour. These findings contribute to our understanding of the critical role that representatives of institutions play in shaping cooperative relationships in modern societies.

The dark side of nostalgia: Yearning for the past fosters bribe-taking

Past work has demonstrated the psychological benefits of nostalgia; however, little is known about its 'dark side'. Considering both the sociality of nostalgia and the relational nature of bribery, we proposed that nostalgia would bolster social connectedness, which, in turn, would promote bribe-taking. We conducted four experiments (N = 887 online and laboratory participants) to test this assumption. Experimentally induced nostalgia boosted the willingness to take a bribe across different scenarios (Experiments 1 and 2) and facilitated bribe-taking behaviour (Experiment 3); the increased social connectedness accounted for these effects (Experiments 2 and 3). Furthermore, the positive effect of social connectedness on bribe-taking was salient, especially when bribe-taking was framed as a way of establishing social relationships (Experiment 4). The findings not only broaden our understanding of nostalgia and bribe-taking but also provide practical implications for anti-bribery initiatives.

The Influence of Sociocultural Beliefs on Adolescents' Moral and Tolerance Evaluations Toward Corruption

In the present research, we examine how sociocultural beliefs facilitate more positive and tolerant evaluations toward corruption. Ninety-six adolescents from 6th grade (M = 11.9 years), 11th grade (M = 16.6 years), and college (M = 20.5 years), from Colombia-a country with high levels of corruption-evaluated how morally right and acceptable were bribery and nepotism across a baseline condition without sociocultural information, and three experimental conditions including sociocultural beliefs about illegality, institutional illegitimacy, and survival. Results suggest that compared to the baseline, the sociocultural beliefs in the three experimental conditions lead to more positive and tolerant evaluations, and less severity and more acceptability towards corruption in different degrees. Implications for moral reasoning about corruption are discussed.

Economic inequality breeds corrupt behaviour

Economists and political scientists have long debated the relations between economic inequality and corruption at the societal level. Extending this literature, we proposed and tested that economic inequality breeds the corrupt behaviour of individuals. Analyses of 45-year archival data from the United States found that official corruption crimes were more prevalent in years and states with greater economic inequality. Three subsequent experiments (N = 776) using economic games showed that individuals exposed to greater economic inequality exhibited more corrupt behaviour in both Chinese and American cultures. Furthermore, the increased desire for wealth and the perception of reduced fairness accounted for this effect. These findings highlight that excessive economic inequality creates a competitive environment in which people give priority to themselves over others and suggest a vicious cycle between economic inequality and corruption.

The chronology of collective cheating: a qualitative study of collective dishonesty in academic contexts

Collective cheating can have serious consequences in professional and educational settings. Existing data show that collective cheating is common and that individuals cheat more when they are in groups, highlighting the existence of some collective organisation in the endeavour. However, little is known about the emergence of this behaviour and the group processing involved. Drawing on qualitative data from 20 semi-structured interviews and a thematic analysis, the present study explored collective cheating in academic contexts. Seven themes emerged that retrace the chronology of collective cheating from its beginning to its impact on the group: reasons, birth and organisation of collective cheating, risk management, concealment strategies, justifications and social impact. Participants emphasised the extrinsic benefits, the interdependence of members and the importance of existing social norms, as well as the positive valence of this kind of dishonesty. In participants' recalls, cheating together means cooperating, showing solidarity, helping and supporting each other.

Bad machines corrupt good morals

As machines powered by artificial intelligence (AI) influence humans' behaviour in ways that are both like and unlike the ways humans influence each other, worry emerges about the corrupting power of AI agents. To estimate the empirical validity of these fears, we review the available evidence from behavioural science, human-computer interaction and AI research. We propose four main social roles through which both humans and machines can influence ethical behaviour. These are: role model, advisor, partner and delegate. When AI agents become influencers (role models or advisors), their corrupting power may not exceed the corrupting power of humans (yet). However, AI agents acting as enablers of unethical behaviour (partners or delegates) have many characteristics that may let people reap unethical benefits while feeling good about themselves, a potentially perilous interaction. On the basis of these insights, we outline a research agenda to gain behavioural insights for better AI oversight.

Rule Following Mitigates Collaborative Cheating and Facilitates the Spreading of Honesty Within Groups

Compared with working alone, interacting in groups can increase dishonesty and give rise to collaborative cheating-the joint violation of honesty. At the same time, collaborative cheating emerges some but not all of the time, even when dishonesty is not sanctioned and economically rational. Here, we address this conundrum. We show that people differ in their extent to follow arbitrary and costly rules and observe that "rule-followers" behave more honestly than "rule-violators." Because rule-followers also resist the temptation to engage in collaborative cheating, dyads and groups with at least one high rule-follower have fewer instances of coordinated violations of honesty. Whereas social interaction can lead to a "social slippery slope" of increased cheating, rule-abiding individuals mitigate the emergence and spreading of collaborative cheating, leading to a transmission advantage of honesty. Accordingly, interindividual differences in rule following provide a basis through which honest behavior can persist.

Corruption, Fast or Slow? Ethical Leadership Interacts With Machiavellianism to Influence Intuitive Thinking and Corruption

Ethical leadership has been suggested as an organizational factor that could reduce unethical behaviors in an organization. We extend this research by examining how and when ethical leadership could reduce followers’ corruption. We examined the moderating role of followers’ Machiavellianism and the mediating role of intuitive thinking style in the negative effect of ethical leadership on corruption. Across two different studies (field study and experiment), we found that ethical leadership decreases followers’ corruption (Studies 1 and 2) and that this negative effect is mediated by followers’ intuitive thinking style (Study 2). Furthermore, followers’ Machiavellianism moderated the direct negative effect of ethical leadership on corruption. However, the pattern of this moderation was not consistent. In Study 1, we found that ethical leadership has the strongest direct negative impact on corruption when followers’ Machiavellianism is high, whereas in Study 2, we found that ethical leadership has the strongest direct negative effect on corruption when followers’ Machiavellianism is low. The theoretical implications for corruption, ethical leadership, and information processing research, as well as practical implications for corruption prevention, will be discussed.

Dishonesty as a signal of trustworthiness: Honesty-Humility and trustworthy dishonesty

Trustworthiness is a foundation of well-functioning relationships and societies, and thus often perceived as a socially normative behaviour. Correspondingly, a broad array of research found that people tend to act in a trustworthy way and signal their trustworthiness to others, and that trustworthiness is rewarded. Herein, we explore whether this motivation to behave trustworthily can have socially undesirable effects in terms of leading to dishonesty targeted at fulfilling the trustor's expectations (i.e. trustworthy dishonesty). Furthermore, we examine how the basic trait of Honesty-Humility, which has consistently been found to be linked to both higher honesty and trustworthiness, relates to trustworthy dishonesty, where honesty and trustworthiness are at odds. Specifically, we conducted three pre-registered studies (N = 7080), introducing a novel behavioural game, the lying-trust game, where participants had a chance to lie to act trustworthily. In two studies, we found that, when offered 'full trust', participants high in Honesty-Humility (i.e. the top 10%) engaged in trustworthy dishonesty, i.e. lied in order to avoid maximizing their own incentive at the cost of minimizing the incentive of their trustor. This pattern was not present when the trustor offered minimal trust only, as well as among participants low in Honesty-Humility (i.e. the bottom 10%).

Does power corrupt? The moderating effect of status

Findings on the effect of power on corruption are mixed. To make sense of these mixed results, three studies were conducted to examine the moderating role of status on this effect. In Study 1, corrupt intent was measured using a corruption scenario that contained manipulations of power and status. In Study 2, corrupt behaviour was measured in a corruption game that contained manipulations of power and status. Study 3 was conducted in real organisational settings, and aimed to expand the external validity of Studies 1 and 2. The results of all three studies consistently indicated that the effect of power was moderated by status. Specifically, power increased corruption when status was low, whereas this effect disappeared when status was high. The implications of reducing the facilitating effect of power on corruption by considering status from the perspective of social hierarchy are discussed.