Logically, in life we heard statement in TV, Radio or Social Media that claimed the human economic status (income, savings, price and etc) made people to behave unethically (buying illegal goods, involve in illegal consumption and etc).
Theoretically, economic influence in this discussion refer to all factors that influence individual purchase/use decision for example disposable income (Chen et.al, 2010), product price and tax (Martinez et. al, 2018).
But are there any researches investigate this connection?
It is not the harm of Economics - It is the criminal mind of people .
There's a lot out there that looks at economics and crime. You'll really have to pare this topic down to get more succinct answers. Here's some starting points:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/293b/44ef06a332b0cbb4c4b352e1d5dc35fe69f4.pdf
Broude, T., & Teichman, D. (2009). Outsourcing and insourcing crime: The political economy of globalized criminal activity. Vand. L. Rev., 62, 795.
Wickman, P., & Dailey, T. (Eds.). (1982). White-Collar and Economic Crime: Multidisciplinary and cross-national perspectives. Lexington. Massachusetts: Lexington Books.
There is a drive for some especially among the greedy to exert economic influence over others since they do not think ethics is foremost in their list of values. They do not hesitate to engage in quid pro quo behaviors when occupying elected offices of the government. Thus it creates a rich breeding ground for corruption
Make sense. I wish i can quote what you've said in my research hihihi....thanks for reply. Please do support me for more future research ..be safe then.
Thanks for the reply. The operational definition of economic influence is the economic status of an individual such as the income status, saving stability, purchasing power).
So are they really give impacts on intention to behave ethically or unethically?
I wish i can find an article or research that highlight the dimensions of economic influence in details.
As you can tell, the responses are opinions and not research based. But to my knowledge there is little research that tries to deal with the question directly because unbiased data is so hard to obtain. After all, truth is highly dependent upon opinion and creating a truthful research paradigm for your question is extremely difficult to do. I know of no one who has truly been able to get people to not think about their answers when they know they are a part of a research protocol. So one has to design research in which the knowledge of being in a research program is usually attempted to be hidden. Test our own knowledge: can you conceive of a research protocol that could hide the fact that it is trying to get at the relationship between income and the truth of responses. It would have to be more than a double blind process and they are very hard to perform. If you can conceive of one and pull it off you will be a well known person after you publish it.
Indeed. I also have the same thought but still have faith that someone out there investigate the connection. Hope hehehe
The way I see it, there are two parallel forms of reasoning that often reach different conclusions. Objective Economic reasoning uses math to weight the value of input and results according to utilitarian reasoning. The end justifies the means and harm is often portrayed as a justifiable cost. Subjective Moral reasoning is guided by sensory feedback we call moral emotions. This sensory "feedback" can render what is portrayed as an economically justifiable harm as immoral. Internal sensations of right/wrong used to override economic reasoning because of intense training via storytelling. For instance, The Cat in the Hat teaches us to clean up our messes because it is the "right thing to do." This along with other stories causes/d a visceral repulsion against leaving your mess for someone else. Only when the visceral sensations we call moral emotions outweigh the economic benefits do people act in ways that despite the cost, "feel" like the right thing to do.
OK Annette suggests an approach: where does money create such negative visceral reactions that one can see the disconnect between the good value and the bad value of money? Set up a research protocol that tests for positive and negative reactions to your opposing value situations and see the distribution of positive and negative responses to each situation. Then, at least, you will have some indication of what kind of situations are perceived negatively. Then do a follow-up study to see if you can at least predict that you can define 95% of the time when the disconnected relationship will be perceived by the general public. Good luck!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media
- Social Media