Advertisement

The Usefulness of Social Norm Theory in Empirical Business Ethics Research: A Review and Suggestions for Future Research

  • Allen D. Blay
  • Eric S. Gooden
  • Mark J. Mellon
  • Douglas E. Stevens
Article

Abstract

In response to recent calls to extend the underlying theories used in the literature (O’Fallon and Butterfield in J Bus Ethics 59(4):375–413, 2005; Craft in J Bus Ethics 117(2):221–259, 2013), we review the usefulness of social norm theory in empirical business ethics research. We begin by identifying the seeds of social norm theory in Adam Smith’s (in: Raphael and Macfie (eds) The Theory of Moral Sentiments, the Glasgow Edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1759/1790) seminal work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Next, we introduce recent theory in social norm activation by Bicchieri (The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006) and compare the new theory to two theoretical frameworks found in the literature: Kohlberg’s (in: Goslin (ed) Handbook of socialization theory and research, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, 1969; in: Lickona (ed) Moral development and behavior, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1976) theory of moral development and Cialdini and Trost’s (in: Gilbert et al. (eds) The handbook of social psychology, Oxford University Press, Boston, 1998) taxonomy of social norms. We argue that the new theory provides useful insights by emphasizing the ability of situational cues and information to generate common expectations for social/moral norms. The theory is particularly useful for empirical research in business ethics because it gives both organizational and individual factors a role in motivating norm-based behavior. To demonstrate this usefulness, we present examples where the theory has been effectively applied in experimental accounting research to generate new insights. We conclude by citing specific examples where the theory may prove useful in empirical business ethics research.

Keywords

Empirical business ethics research Social norm theory Moral theory Economic theory Adam Smith 

References

  1. Abdel-Rahim, H., & Stevens, D. (2016). The behavioral effect of information system precision on honesty in managerial reporting: An experimental examination incorporating operating uncertainty. Georgia State University Working Paper.Google Scholar
  2. Bailey, C., Scott, I., & Thoma, S. (2010). Revitalizing accounting ethics research in the neo-Kohlbergian framework: Putting the DIT into perspective. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(2), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bampton, R., & Cowton, C. (2013). Taking stock of accounting ethics scholarship: A review of the journal literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (1994). Principles of biomedical ethics (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berry, C. (2003). Sociality and socialisation. In A. Broadie (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to the Scottish enlightenment (pp. 243–257). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berry, C. (2006). Smith and science. In K. Haakonssen (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Adam Smith (pp. 112–135). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society: The nature and dynamics of social norms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bobek, D., Hageman, A., & Kelliher, C. (2013). Analyzing the role of social norms in tax compliance behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(3), 451–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bobek, D., Roberts, R., & Sweeney, J. (2007). The social norms of tax compliance: Evidence from Australia, Singapore, and the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(1), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, J., Evans, J., & Moser, D. (2009). Agency theory and participative budgeting experiments. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 21(1), 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell, T. (1971). Adam Smith’s science of morals. London: Alan & Unwin.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, D. (1975). On the conflicts between biological and social evolution and between psychology and moral tradition. American Psychologist, 30(12), 1103–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cialdini, R., Kallgren, C., & Reno, R. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24, 201–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cialdini, R., & Trost, M. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). Boston: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Craft, J. (2013). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 2004–2011. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(2), 221–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Davidson, B., & Stevens, D. (2013). Can a code of ethics improve manager behavior and investor confidence? An experimental study. The Accounting Review, 88(1), 51–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Douthit, J., Schwartz, S., Stevens, D., & R. Young. (2016). The effect of endogenous contract selection on budgetary slack: An experimental examination of trust, distrust, and trustworthiness. Georgia State University Working Paper.Google Scholar
  18. Douthit, J., & Stevens, D. (2015). The robustness of honesty concerns on budget proposals when the superior has rejection authority. The Accounting Review, 90(2), 467–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erhard, W., Jensen, M., & Zaffron, S. (2009). Integrity: A positive model that incorporates the normative phenomena of morality, ethics and legality. Harvard Business School Negotiation, Organizations and Markets Working Paper No. 06-11.Google Scholar
  20. Erhard, W., Jensen, M., & Zaffron, S. (2010). Integrity: A positive model that incorporates the normative phenomena of morality, ethics and legality-abridged. Harvard Business School Negotiation, Organizations and Markets Working Paper No. 10-061.Google Scholar
  21. Evans, J., Hannan, L., Krishnan, R., & Moser, D. (2001). Honesty in managerial reporting. The Accounting Review, 76(4), 537–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fisher, D., & Sweeney, J. (1998). The relationship between political attitudes and moral judgment: Examining the validity of the Defining Issues Test. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(8), 905–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fleischacker, S. (1991). Philosophy in moral practice: Kant and Adam Smith. Kant-Studien, 82, 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ford, R., & Richardson, W. (1994). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(3), 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friedman, M. (1953). Essays in positive economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Friedman, D., & Sunder, S. (1994). Experimental methods: A primer for economists. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Griswold, C. (1999). Adam Smith and the virtues of enlightenment. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hannan, R., Rankin, F., & Towry, K. (2006). The effect of information systems on honesty in managerial reporting: A behavioral perspective. Contemporary Accounting Research/Recherche Comptable Contemporaine, 23(4), 885–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hobson, J., Mellon, M., & Stevens, D. (2011). Determinants of moral judgments regarding budgetary slack: An experimental examination of pay scheme and personal values. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(1), 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jackson, D. (1994). Jackson personality inventory-revised manual. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Assessment Systems.Google Scholar
  32. Jensen, M. (2001). Corporate budgeting is broken—Let’s fix it. Harvard Business Review, 70(November), 94–101.Google Scholar
  33. Jensen, M., & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jones, T. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.Google Scholar
  35. Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  36. Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral states and moralization: The cognitive developmental approach. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior (pp. 31–53). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  37. Loe, T., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(3), 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lord, A., & DeZoort, F. (2001). The impact of commitment and moral reasoning on auditors’ responses to social influence pressure. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 26(3), 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Modgil, S., & Modgil, C. (1986). Lawrence Kohlberg: Consensus and controversy. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  40. O’Fallon, M., & Butterfield, K. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(4), 375–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pepitone, A. (1976). Toward a normative and comparative biocultural social psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 641–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ponemon, L. (1993). Can ethics be taught in accounting? Journal of Accounting Education, 11(2), 185–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Randall, D., & Gibson, A. (1990). Methodology in business ethics research: A review and critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(6), 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rankin, F., Schwartz, S., & Young, R. (2008). The effect of honesty and superior authority on budget proposals. The Accounting Review, 83(4), 1083–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Raphael, D. (2007). The impartial spectator: Adam Smith’s moral philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Raphael, D., & Macfie, A. (1982). Introduction. In D. D. Raphael & A. L. Macfie (Eds.), The Theory of Moral Sentiments (6th ed., pp. 1–52). Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund Inc.Google Scholar
  47. Reeder, J. (1997). Introduction. In J. Reeder (Ed.), On moral sentiments: Contemporary responses to Adam Smith (pp. vii–xxi). Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
  48. Rest, J. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  49. Rest, J. (1986a). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  50. Rest, J. (1986b). Moral research methodology. In S. Modgil & C. Modgil (Eds.), Lawrence Kohlberg: Consensus and controversy (pp. 455–469). Philadelphia: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  51. Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., & Thoma, S. (1999). Postconventional moral thinking: A Neo-Kohlbergian approach. Minneapolis, MN: Center for the Study of Ethical Development, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  52. Schatzberg, J., Sevcik, G., Shapiro, B., Thorne, L., & Wallace, R. (2005). A reexamination of behavior in experimental audit markets: The effects of moral reasoning and economic incentives on auditor reporting and fees. Contemporary Accounting Research, 22(1), 229–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Smith, A. (1759; 6th ed., 1790). The Theory of Moral Sentiments, the Glasgow Edition (D. D. Raphael & A. L. Macfie, Eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, V. (2008). Rationality in economics: Constructivist and ecological forms. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Stevens, D. (2002). The effects of reputation and ethics on budgetary slack. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 14, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stevens, D. (2011). Rediscovering Adam Smith: How The Theory of Moral Sentiments can explain emerging evidence in experimental economics. Adam Smith Working Papers Series 2011:04, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  57. Stevens, D., & Thevaranjan, A. (2010). A moral solution to the moral hazard problem. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 35(1), 125–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sunder, S. (2005). Minding our manners: Accounting as social norms. The British Accounting Review, 37(4), 367–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sweeney, J., & Roberts, R. (1997). Cognitive moral development and auditor independence. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(3/4), 337–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Allen D. Blay
    • 1
  • Eric S. Gooden
    • 2
  • Mark J. Mellon
    • 3
  • Douglas E. Stevens
    • 4
  1. 1.College of BusinessFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  2. 2.College of Business and EconomicsBoise State UniversityBoiseUSA
  3. 3.Muma College of BusinessUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  4. 4.Robinson College of BusinessGeorgia State UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations