Prospection in Individual and Interpersonal Corruption Dilemmas

Abstract

Corruption represents 1 of the main societal challenges of our time. At present, there is no theoretical framework distinguishing the prospective decision-making processes involved in different acts of corruption. We differentiate between 2 broad categories of corrupt acts that have different implications for prospective cognition: individual corrupt acts, which refer to a power holder individually abusing entrusted power; and interpersonal corrupt acts, which refer to a power holder abusing entrusted power in collaboration with other corrupt agents. We model the decision structure as 2 inherently different social dilemmas: individual corruption requires a power holder to prospect own and collective consequences, whereas interpersonal corruption requires a prospection of self-interest, the interest of corrupt partner(s) conflict and collective interests (nested social dilemma). Individual and interpersonal corruption rest on different prospective decision-making processes, which we illustrate along intrapersonal factors (prospection of costs and benefits, self-control, guilt) and interpersonal factors (social norms, trust). We explore the advantages of this novel distinction for theory development, experimental corruption research, as well as anticorruption efforts.

The image of a corrupt official as perceived by Russia’s youth: using the unfinished sentences method

“…This includes corrupt behaviour (Köbis et al 2016). Abraham and Pane (2014) examine how so-called "moral" emotions influence corrupt behaviour by measuring the emotional responses of students in Indonesia to situational vignettes.…”

Effects of perceived descriptive norms on corrupt intention: The mediating role of moral disengagement

“…Corruption refers to the deviant behaviour, violating legal or moral principles, and deliberately abusing entrusted power for private gains (Köbis, van Prooijen, Righetti, & Van Lange, ; Transparency International, ; Zhao, Zhang, & Xu, ). It lowers people's subjective well‐being, undermines institutional trust, increases social inequality, damages economic growth, erodes the quality of infrastructures and even threatens political stability (Alesina & Angeletos, ; Ambraseys & Bilham, ; Tay, Herian, & Diener, ).…”

“…That is, to accept the bribe or to abide by internal moral standards. When power holders accept a bribe, corruption occurs (Köbis et al, ). Social norms theory suggests that the behaviour of individuals largely depends on their perception of the quantity and frequency of that specific behaviour conducted by others (Scholly, Katz, Gascoigne, & Holck, ).…”

“…Research has shown that different forms of corruption hold different psychological mechanisms (Köbis et al, ; Weisel & Shalvi, ). For example, the prospective processes of individual (e.g., embezzlement) and interpersonal corruption (e.g., bribery; Köbis et al, ), as well as active (e.g., bribe‐offering) and passive corruption (e.g., bribe‐taking; Weisel & Shalvi, ) differ substantially. Since bribe‐taking has become the most common type of corruption in transitional China (Guo, ), the focus of the current study is therefore on this passive form of corruption.…”

Behavioral and Cultural Accounts of Corruption in the Interface Between Public Officer and Client

“…Some social science models explain the persistence of corruption as being a result of individual personality or volition (psychology; Köbis, Van Prooijen, Righetti, & Van Lange, 2016;Rabl & Kühlmann, 2008); strategic or rational choices of individuals (economics; Mishra, 2005;Barr & Serra, 2010;Basu, 2011); political system (political science; Karklins, 2005) and societal norms (sociology and anthropology; Le Vine, 1975). Despite the strength of behavior analytic tools in explaining corrupt behavior, there are very few behavior analytic works on corruption.…”