How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior: A Role Congruity Approach

Ke Michael Mai, Aleksander P.J. Ellis, David Welsh

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    A significant body of research has emerged in order to better understand unethical behavior at work and how gender plays a role in the process. In this study, we look to add to this literature by exploring how perpetrator gender influences reactions to distinct types of unethicality. Rather than viewing unethical behavior as a unitary construct, where all forms of lying, cheating, and stealing are the same, we integrate theories and concepts from the criminal justice and moral psychology literatures to categorize certain unethical behaviors as either impulsive or premeditated. Given the agentic nature of premeditated unethical behavior, we draw from role congruity theory to predict that women will be punished more severely than men for their role incongruous actions. Impulsive unethical behavior, on the other hand, will be less likely to elicit perceptions of congruity or incongruity, leading to less of a gender effect. Results from three studies sampling both undergraduates and working adults in the United States, Singapore, and South Korea showed that participants were more likely to associate premeditated unethical behavior with a male perpetrator because it was seen as less feminine (Study 1), and female perpetrators who engaged in premeditated unethical behavior received more severe punishment than male perpetrators due to the perceived role incongruity of their actions (Study 2 and Study 3). Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalJournal of Business Ethics
    DOIs
    StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

    Fingerprint

    gender
    congruity theory
    role theory
    Perpetrators
    Unethical behavior
    South Korea
    Singapore
    penalty
    psychology
    justice
    literature
    Incongruity

    Keywords

    • Gender
    • Premeditation
    • Role congruence
    • Unethical behavior

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Business and International Management
    • Business, Management and Accounting(all)
    • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
    • Economics and Econometrics
    • Law

    Cite this

    How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior : A Role Congruity Approach. / Mai, Ke Michael; Ellis, Aleksander P.J.; Welsh, David.

    In: Journal of Business Ethics, 01.01.2019.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{8349511dfe594db7971566330bfab104,
    title = "How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior: A Role Congruity Approach",
    abstract = "A significant body of research has emerged in order to better understand unethical behavior at work and how gender plays a role in the process. In this study, we look to add to this literature by exploring how perpetrator gender influences reactions to distinct types of unethicality. Rather than viewing unethical behavior as a unitary construct, where all forms of lying, cheating, and stealing are the same, we integrate theories and concepts from the criminal justice and moral psychology literatures to categorize certain unethical behaviors as either impulsive or premeditated. Given the agentic nature of premeditated unethical behavior, we draw from role congruity theory to predict that women will be punished more severely than men for their role incongruous actions. Impulsive unethical behavior, on the other hand, will be less likely to elicit perceptions of congruity or incongruity, leading to less of a gender effect. Results from three studies sampling both undergraduates and working adults in the United States, Singapore, and South Korea showed that participants were more likely to associate premeditated unethical behavior with a male perpetrator because it was seen as less feminine (Study 1), and female perpetrators who engaged in premeditated unethical behavior received more severe punishment than male perpetrators due to the perceived role incongruity of their actions (Study 2 and Study 3). Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.",
    keywords = "Gender, Premeditation, Role congruence, Unethical behavior",
    author = "Mai, {Ke Michael} and Ellis, {Aleksander P.J.} and David Welsh",
    year = "2019",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1007/s10551-019-04113-y",
    language = "English (US)",
    journal = "Journal of Business Ethics",
    issn = "0167-4544",
    publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - How Perpetrator Gender Influences Reactions to Premeditated Versus Impulsive Unethical Behavior

    T2 - A Role Congruity Approach

    AU - Mai, Ke Michael

    AU - Ellis, Aleksander P.J.

    AU - Welsh, David

    PY - 2019/1/1

    Y1 - 2019/1/1

    N2 - A significant body of research has emerged in order to better understand unethical behavior at work and how gender plays a role in the process. In this study, we look to add to this literature by exploring how perpetrator gender influences reactions to distinct types of unethicality. Rather than viewing unethical behavior as a unitary construct, where all forms of lying, cheating, and stealing are the same, we integrate theories and concepts from the criminal justice and moral psychology literatures to categorize certain unethical behaviors as either impulsive or premeditated. Given the agentic nature of premeditated unethical behavior, we draw from role congruity theory to predict that women will be punished more severely than men for their role incongruous actions. Impulsive unethical behavior, on the other hand, will be less likely to elicit perceptions of congruity or incongruity, leading to less of a gender effect. Results from three studies sampling both undergraduates and working adults in the United States, Singapore, and South Korea showed that participants were more likely to associate premeditated unethical behavior with a male perpetrator because it was seen as less feminine (Study 1), and female perpetrators who engaged in premeditated unethical behavior received more severe punishment than male perpetrators due to the perceived role incongruity of their actions (Study 2 and Study 3). Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.

    AB - A significant body of research has emerged in order to better understand unethical behavior at work and how gender plays a role in the process. In this study, we look to add to this literature by exploring how perpetrator gender influences reactions to distinct types of unethicality. Rather than viewing unethical behavior as a unitary construct, where all forms of lying, cheating, and stealing are the same, we integrate theories and concepts from the criminal justice and moral psychology literatures to categorize certain unethical behaviors as either impulsive or premeditated. Given the agentic nature of premeditated unethical behavior, we draw from role congruity theory to predict that women will be punished more severely than men for their role incongruous actions. Impulsive unethical behavior, on the other hand, will be less likely to elicit perceptions of congruity or incongruity, leading to less of a gender effect. Results from three studies sampling both undergraduates and working adults in the United States, Singapore, and South Korea showed that participants were more likely to associate premeditated unethical behavior with a male perpetrator because it was seen as less feminine (Study 1), and female perpetrators who engaged in premeditated unethical behavior received more severe punishment than male perpetrators due to the perceived role incongruity of their actions (Study 2 and Study 3). Implications are discussed as well as possible limitations and directions for future research.

    KW - Gender

    KW - Premeditation

    KW - Role congruence

    KW - Unethical behavior

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060733197&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060733197&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1007/s10551-019-04113-y

    DO - 10.1007/s10551-019-04113-y

    M3 - Article

    JO - Journal of Business Ethics

    JF - Journal of Business Ethics

    SN - 0167-4544

    ER -