Reactions to Defiant Deviants

Monin, Benoît; O'Connor, Kieran

doi:10.1002/9781444390841.ch14

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although we expect ethical champions to influence team ethical decisions via team ethical awareness (Hypotheses 1 and 2), with angry champions having a stronger effect (Hypothesis 3), it is less clear how they will fare interpersonally. According to the minority influence and dissent literature, perceived threat to the team and its members might be key to explaining liking and disliking of ethical champions (Festinger, 1950; Jetten & Hornsey, 2014; Monin & O’Connor, 2011). Because team members are motivated to move toward team goals and promote team cohesion, members may socially reject ethical champions when they are perceived to threaten team goal achievement or team harmony (Jetten & Hornsey, 2011).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical champions, emotions, framing, and team ethical decision making.

Chen¹,

Treviño²,

Humphrey³

2020

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has offered a pessimistic (although limited) view regarding the effectiveness of ethical champions in teams and the social consequences they are likely to experience. To challenge this view, we conducted two multimethod (quantitative/qualitative) experimental studies in the context of entrepreneurial team decision-making to examine whether and how an ethical champion can shape team decision ethicality and whether ethical champions experience interpersonal costs. In Study 1, we found that confederate ethical champions influenced team decisions to be more ethical by increasing team ethical awareness. Focusing on the emotional expressions of ethical champions, we found that sympathetic and angry ethical champions both increased team decision ethicality but that angry ethical champions were more disliked. Analysis of team interaction videos further revealed moral disengagement in team discussions and the emergence of nonconfederate ethical champions who used business frames to argue for the ethical decision. Those emergent phenomena shifted our focus, in Study 2, to how ethical champions framed the issues and the mediating processes involved. We found that ethical champions using ethical frames not only increased team ethical awareness but also consequently reduced team moral disengagement, resulting in more ethical team decisions. Ethical champions using business frames also improved team decision ethicality, but by increasing the perceived business utility of the ethical decision.

show abstract

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical champions, emotions, framing, and team ethical decision making.

Chen¹,

Treviño²,

Humphrey³

2020

Journal of Applied Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are multiple reasons to expect that people may see snitching as moral, especially in the absence of relationship-specific loyalty obligations. Research in economics and psychology suggests that people think it is morally right to condemn and punish wrongdoers (Carlsmith et al, 2002;DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009, 2013Graham et al, 2009Graham et al, , 2011Hofmann et al, 2018;Monin & O'Connor, 2011;Rai & Fiske, 2011). Some even argue that seeking justice for wrongdoings-through condemnation and punishment-is at the heart of what it means to be a moral person (e.g., Carlsmith et al, 2002;DeScioli & Kurzban, 2009;Rai & Fiske, 2011).…”

Section: The Upstanding Snitch: Why Might Snitchingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8A related line of work from Monin et al (2008) sheds some light on this point. These authors found that “moral rebels,” people who go against the status quo (e.g., by speaking out on moral issues) in the name of their principles, are viewed favorably by neutral others but unfavorably by people who are implicated by their behavior (Monin et al, 2008; Monin & O’Connor, 2011). In a sense, the witnesses we studied here represent a special case of moral rebellion: forgoing the ties of loyalty to close others to expose their wrongdoing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral paragons, but crummy friends: The case of snitching.

Berry,

Silver,

Shaw

2024

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Loyalty to friends is an important moral value, but does that mean snitching on friends is considered immoral? Across six preregistered studies, we examine how loyalty obligations impact people's moral evaluations of snitching (i.e., turning in others who commit transgressions). In vignette and incentivized partner choice paradigms, we find that witnesses who snitch (vs. do not snitch) are seen as more moral and as better leaders (Studies 1-6), regardless of whether they snitch on a friend or an acquaintance (Studies 1-3). We find that a willingness to turn in one's friends increases perceived morality, while an unwillingness to do so diminishes it, with the latter effect exhibiting a stronger impact than the former (Study 2). Our experiments also demonstrate that snitches receive less moral credit when snitching on nonmoral (vs. moral) transgressions (Study 3) and when snitching aligns with self-interest (Study 4). We demonstrate that although snitching is often seen as morally right, turning in transgressors entails important reputational trade-offs: Snitching makes one appear disloyal and a bad friend but boosts perceptions of morality and leadership. This reveals a context in which what is loyal is no longer considered moral. Public Significance StatementEffective organizations are often characterized by (a) strong relationships among employees such that coworkers get along and look out for one another and (b) high ethical standards whereby wrongdoing is quickly identified and stamped out. But what happens when these things come into conflict? Here, we explore how people judge whistleblowers who forsake loyalty to their friends by snitching on them. We find that although loyalty is often considered a critical moral value, behaving disloyally-turning in friends to expose wrongdoing-is seen as the morally righteous path.

show abstract

“…The greatest punishment a community can inflict is stigmatizing those who deviate from the communal norms (Frable et al, 1990;Crocker et al, 1998;Major and O'Brien, 2005; 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1132624 Jetten and Hornsey, 2010;Monin and O'Connor, 2011;Levine and Marques, 2016). Specifically, the Ultraorthodox community stigmatizes individuals who engage in activities such as using drugs (Loewenthal, 2014) or defining themselves as LGBTthat is, activities/notions that violate communal norms.…”

Section: The Community Attitude Toward Deviationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enlisting in the army in the Jewish Ultraorthodox community and the consequences for wellbeing

Malovicki-Yaffe,

Itzhaki-Braun,

Shahar-Rosenblum

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Israeli law requires citizens to enlist in the army at 18 years old. However, the Jewish Ultraorthodox community has a longstanding agreement with the state that members of this community will not have to enlist in the army, given its spiritual leaders’ strong opposition. Still, there are young men who go against the communal norms and enlist. In the current study we investigated these young men and the contribution of their self-esteem (a personal resource), their sense of community (a communal resource), and the community members’ attitudes toward them (societal conditional regard, both positive and negative, and stigma) to their wellbeing. The current study consisted of 153 participants between the ages of 20 and 55 (M = 29.64, SD = 6.89). A path analysis model indicated the protective role played by self-esteem and sense of community in participants’ wellbeing, and the risk factor posed by societal conditional negative regard and stigma. Moreover, self-esteem was found to mediate between income and wellbeing, whereas sense of community was found to mediate between societal conditional negative regard and wellbeing, and between stigma and wellbeing. The discussion highlights the complexity of the protective role played by sense of community against the risk of experiencing societal conditional negative regard and stigma. It also addresses the importance of promoting intervention programs during the army service of these young men, with a focus on promoting their self-esteem and on the presence of a spiritual leadership that legitimizes working, serving in the army, and yet still being part of the community.

show abstract

Reactions to Defiant Deviants

Cited by 5 publications

References 22 publications

Ethical champions, emotions, framing, and team ethical decision making.

Ethical champions, emotions, framing, and team ethical decision making.

Moral paragons, but crummy friends: The case of snitching.

Enlisting in the army in the Jewish Ultraorthodox community and the consequences for wellbeing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About