Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 84, Supplement 1, pp 151–165 | Cite as

Effects of the Use of the Availability Heuristic on Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations

  • Sefa HayiborEmail author
  • David M. Wasieleski


Recent corporate scandals across various industries have led to an increased focus on research in business ethics, particularly on understanding ethical decision-making. This increased interest is due largely to managers’ desire to reduce the incidence of unwanted behaviors in the workplace. This article examines one major moderator of the ethical decision-making process – moral intensity. In particular, we explore the potential influence of a particular cognitive heuristic – the availability heuristic – on perceptions of moral intensity. It is our contention that moral intensity is a perceptual construct, and that individuals’ use of the availability heuristic will influence perceptions of moral intensity which, in turn, will affect how moral issues are viewed and ultimately resolved. In this article, we present propositions concerning possible relationships between the availabilities of various phenomena and the components that moral intensity comprises, and report on two studies examining the effects of availabilities on two␣of these components: magnitude of consequences and social consensus. Our findings indicated that the availability of consequences associated with an act was positively related to perceptions of the magnitude of consequences of that act. We also found that the availability of others who believe that a particular act is morally acceptable is positively related to perceptions of social consensus that that act is morally acceptable. We posit that our results suggest the possibility that perceptions of moral intensity can be actively influenced to reduce unethical behavior in organizations.


moral intensity ethical decision-making issue recognition availability heuristic cognitive bias 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bandura A.: 1986, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Bird F., J. Gandz: 1991, Good Management: Business Ethics in Action. Prentice-Hall Canada, Scarborough, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyatzis R. E.: 1998, Transforming Qualitative Information. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlson D. S., K. M. Kacmar, L. L. Wadsworth: 2002, The Impact of Moral Intensity Dimensions on Ethical Decision Making: Assessing the Relevance of Orientation. Journal of Managerial Issues 14(1), 15–31Google Scholar
  5. Carroll J. S.: 1978, The Effect of Imagining an Event on Expectations for the Event: An Interpretation in Terms of the Availability Heuristic’. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 14, 88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chia A., L. M. Mee: 2000, The Effects of Issue Characteristics on the Recognition of Moral Issues. Journal of Business Ethics 27, 255–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Douglas P. C., R. A. Davidson, B. N. Schwartz: 2001, The Effect of Organizational Culture and Ethical Orientation on Accountants’ Ethical Judgments. Journal of Business Ethics 34(2), 101–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Folkes V. S.: 1988, The Availability Heuristic and Perceived Risk. Journal of Consumer Research 15(1), 13–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gardner D. G., L. L. Cummings, R. B. Dunham, J. L. Pierce: 1998, Single-Item Versus Multiple-Item Measurement Scales: An Empirical Comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement 58(6), 898–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones T. M.: 1991, Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model. Academy of Management Review 16(2), 366–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kabanoff B., J. Daly: 2002, Espoused Values in Organisations. Australian Journal of Management 27, 89–104Google Scholar
  12. Kahneman D., P. Slovic, A. Tversky (eds.): 1982, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, pp. 294–305Google Scholar
  13. Kelly P. C., D. R. Elm: 2003, The Effect of Context on Moral Intensity of Ethical Issues: Revising Jones’s Issue-Contingent Model. Journal of Business Ethics 48, 139–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Leitsche D. L.: 2004, Differences in the Perceptions of Moral Intensity in the Moral Decision Process: An Empirical Investigation of Accounting Students. Journal of Business Ethics 53(3), 313–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Levi A. S., J. B. Pryor: 1987, Use of the Availability Heuristic in Probability Estimates of Future Events: The Effects of Imagining Outcomes Versus Imagining Reasons. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 40, 219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lewandowsky S., P. W. Smith: 1983, The Effect of Increasing the Memorability of Category Instances on Estimates of Category Size. Memory and Cognition 11(4), 347–350Google Scholar
  17. Loo R.: 2002, A Caveat on Using Single-Item Versus Multiple-Item Scales. Journal of Management Psychology 17(1), 68–74Google Scholar
  18. Low T. W., L. Ferrell, P. Mansfield: 2000, A Review of Empirical Studies Assessing Ethical Decision Making Business. Journal of Business Ethics 25(3), 185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. MacLeod C., L. Campbell: 1992, Memory Accessibility and Probability Judgments: An Experimental Evaluation of the Availability Heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63, 890–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maley J. E., Hunt M., W. V. Parr: 2000, ‹Set-Size and Frequency-of-Occurrence Judgments in Young and Older Adults: The Role of the Availability Heuristic. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 53, 247–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Manis M., J. Shedler, J. Jonides, T. Nelson: 1993, The Availability Heuristic in Judgments of Set-Size and Frequency of Occurrence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65, 448–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Marshall B., P. Dewe: 1997, An Investigation of the Components of Moral Intensity. Journal of Business Ethics 16, 521–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McKelvie S. J.: 1995, Bias in Estimated Frequency of Names. Perceptual and Motor Skills 81, 1331–1338Google Scholar
  24. McKelvie S. J.: 1997, The Availability Heuristic: Effects of Fame and Gender on the Estimated Frequency of Male and Female Names. Journal of Social Psychology 137, 63–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McKelvie S. J.: 2000, Quantifying the Availability Heuristic with Famous Names. North American Journal of Psychology 2(2), 347–356Google Scholar
  26. McMahon J. M., R. J. Harvey: 2006, An Analysis of the Factor Structure of Jones’ Moral Intensity Construct. Journal of Business Ethics 64, 381–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morris S. A., R. A. McDonald: 1995, The Role of Moral Intensity in Moral Judgments: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Business Ethics 14, 715–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nisbett R. E., Ross, L. D.: 1980, Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  29. Nunnaly J. C.: 1978, Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Oppenheimer D. M.: 2004, Spontaneous Discounting of Availability in Frequency Judgment Tasks. Psychological Science 15(2), 100–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paolillo J. G. P., S. J. Vitell: 2002, An Empirical Investigation of the Influence of Selected Personal, Organizational and Moral Intensity Factors on Ethical Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics 35, 65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Power S. J., L. L. Lundsten: 2005, Managerial and Other White-Collar Employees’ Perceptions of Ethical Issues in Their Workplaces. Journal of Business Ethics 60, 185–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rest J. R.: 1986, Moral Development: Advances in Research and Theory. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Schwarz N., H. Bless, F. Strack, G. Klumpp, H. Rittenauer-Schatka, A. Simons: 1991, Ease of Retrieval as Information: Another Look at the Availability Heuristic. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61(2), 195–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shadish W. R., T. D. Cook, D. T. Campbell D. T.: 2002, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference. Houghton-Mifflin Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  36. Shedler, J. K., J. Jonides and M. Manis: 1985, ‹Availability: Plausible but Questionable’, Paper Presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, BostonGoogle Scholar
  37. Singer M. S., A. E. Singer: 1997, Observer Judgements About Moral Agents’ Ethical Decisions: The Role of Scope of Justice and Moral Intensity. Journal of Business Ethics 16, 473–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singer M., S. Mitchell, J. Turner: 1998, Consideration of Moral Intensity in Ethicality Judgments: Its Relationship with Whistle Blowing and Need-for-Cognition. Journal of Business Ethics 17, 527–541Google Scholar
  39. Singhapakdi A., S. J. Vitell, K. L. Kraft: 1996, Moral Intensity and Ethical Decision-Making of Marketing Professionals. Journal of Business Research 36, 245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stapel D. A., S. D. Reicher, R. Spears: 1995, Contextual Determinants of Strategic Choice: Some Moderators of the Availability Bias. European Journal of Social Psychology 25, 141–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sunstein C. R.: 2003, What’s Available? Social Influence and Behavioral Economics. Northwestern University Law Review 97(3), 1295–1314Google Scholar
  42. Trevino L. K.: 1986, Ethical Decision Making in Organizations: A Person-Situation Interactionist Model. Academy of Management Review 11(3), 601–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Triplet R. G.: 1992, Discriminatory Biases in the Perception of Illness: The Application of Availability and Representativeness Heuristics to the AIDS Crisis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13(3), 303–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tversky A., D. Kahneman: 1973, Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology 5, 207–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Waenke M., N. Scwarz, H. Bless: 1995, The Availability Heuristic Revisited: Experienced Ease of Retrieval in Mundane Frequency Estimates. Acta Psychologica. 89(1), 83–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wanous J. P., A. E. Reichers, M. J. Hudy: 1997, Overall Job Satisfaction: How Good Are Single-Item Measures?. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 247–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Waters J. A., F. Bird, P. D. Chant: 1986, Everyday Moral Issues Experienced by Managers. Journal of Business Ethics 5, 373–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Watley L. D., D. R. May: 2004, Enhancing Moral Intensity: The Roles of Personal and Consequential Information in Ethical Decision-Making. Journal of Business Ethics 50, 105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zacks R. T., L. Hasher, & H. Sanft: 1982, Automatic Encoding of Events Frequency: Further Findings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 8, 106–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saint Mary’s UniversityHalifaxCanada
  2. 2.Duquesne UniversityPittsburghU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations