Published date: Nov 08 2024

Journal Title: KnE Social Sciences

Issue title: International Conference of Psychology 2024 (ICoPsy 2024)

Pages: 171–178

DOI: 10.18502/kss.v9i30.17517

Nadia Khairinanadiakhairina02@gmail.comFaculty of Psychology, Universitas Negeri Malang, malang

Aldianur KhairaniFaculty of Mathematics and Science, Universitas Brawijaya

The influence of surrounding conditions can change a person’s behavior, both positive and negative behavior. The negative behavior in question is a behavior that violates applicable social norms. As with the presence of other people who will benefit from fraudulent behavior that occurs. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify patterns of fraudulent behavior that tend to escalate under the assumption that others will also benefit. This study used an experimental design with two groups that obtained differences in treatment (individual group vs. partner group). The number of participants was 122 people with a sampling technique, namely random sampling. The results of this study showed that the group that was informed that only participants themselves would receive benefits from each question that could be answered correctly showed lower average results (M = 6.88), when compared to the group that was informed that the benefits obtained would also be felt by partners from participants (M = 11.44). So it can be concluded that if there is profit sharing with others, it increases a person’s tendency to engage in unethical behavior.

Keywords: self-serving altruism, experiment, unethical behavior

[1] Baron RA, Branscombe NR. Social Psychology. USA: Pearson; 2011.

[2] Asch, S. E. (1959). Studies of Independence and Conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monograph: General and Apllied, 70 (9).

[3] Gino F, Ayal S, Ariely D. Self serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others. J Econ Behav Organ. 2013 Sep;93:285–92.

[4] Gino F, Schweitzer ME, Mead N, Ariely D. Unable to resist temptation: how selfcontrol depletion promotes unethical behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2011;115(2):191–203.

[5] Mead NL, Baumeister RF, Gino F, Schweitzer ME, Ariely D. Too tired to tell the truth: self-control resource depletion and dishonesty. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009;45(3):594– 7.

[6] Anandya, D., & Ramadhana, K. (2023). Lalola Easter. Laporan Hasil Pemantauan Tren Penindakan Kasus Korupsi Tahun 2022.

[7] Gino F, Pierce L. Dishonesty in the name of equity. Psychol Sci. 2009 Sep;20(9):1153– 60.

[8] Mazar N, Amir O, Ariely D. The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. J Mark Res. 2008;45(6):633–44.

[9] Trevino LK, Weaver GR, Reynolds SJ. Behavioral ethics in organizations: A Review. J Manage. 2006;32(6):951–90.

[10] Gino F, Pierce L. Lying to level the playing filed: why people may dishonestly help or hurt others to create equity. J Bus Ethics. 2010;95 S1:89–103.

[11] Beauchamp TL, Bowie NE. Ethical Theory and Business. 7th ed. Prentice Hall: Pearson; 2004.

[12] Schminke M, Ambrose ML, Neubaum DO. The Effects of leader moral development on ethical climate and employee attitudes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2005;97(2):135–51.

[13] Schweitzer ME, Ordonez L, Douma B. Goal setting as a motivator of unethical Behavior. Acad Manage J. 2004;47(3):422–32.

[14] Bies RJ. The predicament of injustice: The management of moral outrage. In: Cummings LL, Staw BM, editors. Research in Organizational Behavior. Volume 9. Greenwich (CT): JAI Press; 1987. pp. 289–319.

[15] Gino F, Ariely D. The dark side of creativity: original thinkers can be more dishonest. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2012 Mar;102(3):445–59.

[16] Tedeschi JT, Rosenfeld P. Impression management theory and forced compliance situations. In: Tedeschi JR, editor. Impression Management Theory and Social Psychological Research. New York: Academic Press; 1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978- 0-12-685180-9.50013-0.

[17] Diekmann KA. Implicit justifications and self-serving group allocations. J Organ Behav. 1997;18(1):3–16.

[18] Wiltermuth SS. Cheating more when the spoils are split. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2011;115(2):157–68.

[19] Loewenstein GF, Thompson L, Bazerman MH. Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1989;57(3):426–41.