Does Asking Make a Difference? Effects of Initiator, Possible Gain, and Risk on Attributed Altruism

Quigley, Barbara; Gaes, Gerald G.; Tedeschi, James T.

doi:10.1080/00224545.1989.9711726

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Altruistic motivations are characterized as purely voluntary and are also not inspired by the potential of rewards or to avoiding punishment, or being beneficial to others ( Leeds, 1963 ). Conversely, selfish motives stem from individuals personally benefitting from their actions ( Quigley, Gaes, & Tedeschi, 1989 ). Weinstein, DeHaan, and Ryan (2010 ) found that when people make altruistic attributions about others' helping behaviors, they are more thankful and perceive the helper "as more generous, admirable, and as exhibiting a larger number of positive and a smaller number of negative personality characteristics" (p. 428).…”

Section: Attribution Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Hero or “Prince of Darkness”? Locating Peer Jacob Svenkerud in an Attributions-Based Typology of Whistleblowers

Richardson¹

2021

Whistleblowing, Communication and Consequences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Did stakeholders consider whistleblower Peer Jacob Svenkerud (PJS) a "hero" or a "prince of darkness"? The answer depends on which stakeholder you ask. Stakeholders include "any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives" ( Freeman, 1984 , p. 46). One of their primary functions, then, is to grant (or withdraw) social legitimacy to the focal organization. Because whistleblowers' accusations threaten organizations' legitimacy, they're often met with management retaliation. But if whistleblowers can garner stakeholder support, their chances of ending wrongdoing and preserving their positions are enhanced ( Sawyer, Johnson, & Holub, 2010 ). The PJS account offers us an opportunity to examine, in detail, stakeholder involvement in a high-profile whistleblowing case.The academic literature proves reductionistic in addressing how stakeholders view whistleblowers. Rather than differentiating between them, most scholarship and media accounts cast them as heroes, the proverbial "David" taking on the corrupt "Goliath." This ignores the reality that stakeholders might have very different perceptions of whistleblowers based on the attributions they make about them.This chapter develops a more sophisticated approach to understanding how stakeholders, particularly those outside the organization, might categorize whistleblowers. After a brief literature review addressing motives and attribution theory, I propose a whistleblower typology followed by several theoretical propositions about how select stakeholders might perceive a whistleblower. I then propose PJS's location in the typology before using case details to assess the typology and associated propositions. Whistleblower: Definitions and TypologyWhistleblowers are commonly hailed as "heroes" and "saints" by some groups, namely the media, the general public, and victims of corporate malfeasance, while derided as "snitches," "rats," or "traitors" by the accused and those stakeholders who are dependent upon the focal orga-

show abstract

Section: Attribution Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Hero or “Prince of Darkness”? Locating Peer Jacob Svenkerud in an Attributions-Based Typology of Whistleblowers

Richardson¹

2021

Whistleblowing, Communication and Consequences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Broadly understood, teachers acting altruistically do derive rewards, such as professional satisfaction or seeing their students achieve. A narrow definition will consider that altruism is possible only when complete strangers perform uninitiated, random, and unique acts of kindness to other strangers with no likelihood of reward (Quigley, Gaes, & Tedeschi, 2001). This narrow account fails to acknowledge that many teachers undertake beneficent works on behalf of, or as a service to, students they know-students whom teachers know to have expressed needs-with little or no expectation of reward other than the satisfaction of meeting those needs.…”

Section: Ethical Teacher Professionalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Freire’s Pedagogy of Freedom: Its Contribution to the Development of Ethical Teacher Professionality through the Implementation of the New Zealand Curriculum

Benadé

2020

paideusis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper takes lessons and directions from Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of Freedom (1998) that both inform the theme of Dialogue and Difference and a particular conception of ethical teacher professionality. Freire’s vision of teachers and teaching challenges managerialist notions of teachers as dispassionate, data-driven objects of bureaucratic policy, aligned to a sanitised list of features that make up ‘the effective teacher’. This representation of teachers is unlikely to motivate or prepare teachers in the future to be critical thinking ethical professionals. An alternative conception of the teaching professional is required, and one is presented here which has strong links to Pedagogy of Freedom in particular, and critical pedagogy more generally. Expressed as ‘ethical teacher professionality’, this account suggests a broader approach to the role of teacher than provided by notions such as ‘satisfactory teacher dimensions’ or ‘characteristics of quality teaching’. The New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007) is a policy text whose understanding of teachers is informed by such notions. New Zealand schools engaged in a process of preparation in 2008 and 2009 for full implementation of this revised national curriculum in 2010. The scope of these revisions, expectations of teachers, and the requirement that this implementation be school-based (rather than centrally prescribed) mean that in essence this curriculum goes well beyond a mere revision. Further, as a product of early-21st century education reform which seemingly gives schools, teachers and communities greater flexibility, there are lessons that could be relevant internationally. As a fundamentally new approach to policy, implementation of the New Zealand Curriculum could significantly alter how teachers see and approach their work.

show abstract

“…Altruistic motivations are characterized as voluntary, being beneficial to others, and not inspired by expectations of a reward or to avoid punishment (Leeds, 1963). Selfish motives stem from individuals appearing to personally benefit from their behavior (Quigley, Gaes, & Tedeschi, 1989) and include harming others and seeking fame, notoriety, and monetary rewards, such as percentages of monies recovered through their reports (Miceli & Near, 1997). Research indicates when people make altruistic attributions about others’ helping behaviors, they feel more gratitude, and perceive the helper “as more generous, admirable, and as exhibiting a larger number of positive and a smaller number of negative personality characteristics” (Weinstein, DeHaan, & Ryan, 2010, p. 428).…”

Section: Whistleblowing: Motives and Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ Attributions of Whistleblowers: The Effects of Complicity and Motives on Perceptions of Likeability, Credibility, and Legitimacy

Richardson

Garner

2019

International Journal of Business Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizational wrongdoing remains a persistent, prevalent problem, one that leads to exponentially more injuries, deaths, and cost than street crime in the United States each year. Whistleblowing has become one of the primary ways in which wrongdoing is exposed and investigated, but without support from key stakeholders, whistleblowing may not affect constructive change. This study used an attribution theory framework to explore relationships between stakeholders’ perceptions of different types of whistleblowers. Specifically, we varied whistleblowers’ motives (altruistic and selfish) and involvement in wrongdoing (complicit or innocence) to test their effects on stakeholders’ intentions to ostracize the whistleblower and their perceptions of the whistleblower’s likeability, legitimacy, and three dimensions of credibility (goodwill, trustworthiness, and competence). Respondents were composed of two stakeholder groups, fraternity and sorority members and university alumni. Results indicate that both stakeholder groups found the innocent whistleblower more likeable and credible than the complicit whistleblower, while the fraternity/sorority respondents found the altruistic whistleblowers more likeable, credible, and legitimate, than their selfish counterparts. The article concludes with implications of the findings for whistleblowers, and limitations and directions for future research.

show abstract

Does Asking Make a Difference? Effects of Initiator, Possible Gain, and Risk on Attributed Altruism

Cited by 6 publications

References 6 publications

Hero or “Prince of Darkness”? Locating Peer Jacob Svenkerud in an Attributions-Based Typology of Whistleblowers

Hero or “Prince of Darkness”? Locating Peer Jacob Svenkerud in an Attributions-Based Typology of Whistleblowers

Freire’s Pedagogy of Freedom: Its Contribution to the Development of Ethical Teacher Professionality through the Implementation of the New Zealand Curriculum

Stakeholders’ Attributions of Whistleblowers: The Effects of Complicity and Motives on Perceptions of Likeability, Credibility, and Legitimacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About