1993
DOI: 10.1007/bf00872373
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An investigation into the acceptability of workplace behaviors of a dubious ethical nature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
24
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There are also other studies conducted with university students that indicated no significant gender differences, the major ones being Hegarty and Sims (1978), McCuddy and Peery (1996), Mudrack (1993), Sankaran and Tung (2003), Stanga and Turpen (1991), and White and Dooley (1993).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…There are also other studies conducted with university students that indicated no significant gender differences, the major ones being Hegarty and Sims (1978), McCuddy and Peery (1996), Mudrack (1993), Sankaran and Tung (2003), Stanga and Turpen (1991), and White and Dooley (1993).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Results showed that making copies on the company machine was one of the more unacceptable activities presented, especially for those in the ''presidential'' context. Mudrack (1993) assessed these same 10 items across two studies and concluded that they were generally viewed as more unacceptable than acceptable and without a connection to actual managerial status. While neither Jones (1990) nor Mudrack (1993) specifically assessed the acceptability of copying materials using audiocassette recorders or VCRs within the workplace, we have grouped these technologies due to the possibility that each can produce a high quality copy but not a copy that is indistinguishable from the original.…”
Section: Hypothesis Developmentmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…It is an amoral approach that ignores the needs and rights of others and a general interpersonal strategy of employing devious, manipulative tactics (Calhoon, 1969;Robinson and Shaver, 1973) for personal gain . Machiavellians see nothing wrong with stealing (Harrell and Hartnagel, 1976), cheating (Flynn et al, 1987), or lying (Fletcher, 1990) in their own self-interest (Mudrack, 1993). They lean more toward decisions suggested by an unethical person than toward those proffered by an ethical individual (Wayne and Rubinstein, 1992).…”
Section: Theoretical Foundation and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%