Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Research Approaches to Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
- Cambridge Handbook of Research Approaches to Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Philosophical Approaches
- Part II Empirical Approaches
- Qualitative Approaches
- Quantitative and Experimental Approaches
- Chapter 10 Quantitative Content Analysis as a Method for Business Ethics Research
- Chapter 11 Experiments in Business Ethics
- Contemporary Approaches
- Case Study Approaches
- Part III A Researcher in the Spotlight
- Index
- References
Chapter 11 - Experiments in Business Ethics
from Quantitative and Experimental Approaches
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2017
By
Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Research Approaches to Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
- Cambridge Handbook of Research Approaches to Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Philosophical Approaches
- Part II Empirical Approaches
- Qualitative Approaches
- Quantitative and Experimental Approaches
- Chapter 10 Quantitative Content Analysis as a Method for Business Ethics Research
- Chapter 11 Experiments in Business Ethics
- Contemporary Approaches
- Case Study Approaches
- Part III A Researcher in the Spotlight
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Research Approaches to Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility , pp. 172 - 189Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Ackert, L. F., Church, B. K., Kuang, X. J., & Qi, L. (2011). Lying: an experimental investigation of the role of situational factors. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(04), 605–632.Google Scholar
Albrecht, C., Thompson, J. A., Hoopes, J. L., & Rodrigo, P. (2010). Business ethics journal rankings as perceived by business ethics scholars. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 227–237.Google Scholar
Aquino, K., & Reed, A. II (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423.Google Scholar
Arfaoui, F., Damak-Ayadi, S., Ghram, R., & Bouchekoua, A. (2016). Ethics education and accounting students’ level of moral development: experimental design in tunisian audit context. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(1), 161–173.Google Scholar
Bazerman, M. H., & Gino, F. (2012). Behavioral ethics: Toward a deeper understanding of moral judgment and dishonesty. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 8, 85–104.Google Scholar
Bazerman, M. H., & Moore, D. A. (2008). Judgment in managerial decision making. 8th Edition. NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Bazerman, M. H., & Tenbrunsel, A. E. (2011). Blind spots: Why we fail to do what’s right and what to do about it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Beets, S. D., Lewis, B. R., & Brower, H. H. (2016). The quality of business ethics journals: an assessment based on application. Business & Society, 55(2), 188–213.Google Scholar
Blasi, A. (1990). How should psychologists define morality? Or, the negative side effects of philosophy’s influence on psychology. The moral domain: Essays in the ongoing discussion between philosophy and the social sciences, 38–70. Edited by Wren, Thomas E.. The MIT Press. Cambridge Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64(1), 1.Google Scholar
Collins, D. (2000). The quest to improve the human condition: the first 1500 articles published in Journal of Business Ethics. Journal of Business ethics, 26(1), 1–73.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. (1920; 2004). Reconstruction in philosophy. Mineola, NY. Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. NY: Penguin Random House LLC.Google Scholar
Ellertson, C. F., Ingerson, M. C., & Williams, R. N. (2016). Behavioral ethics: a critique and a proposal. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(1), 145–159.Google Scholar
Greene, J. (2014). Moral tribes: Emotion, reason and the gap between us and them. Penguin Books Ltd. New York.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. (2015). What can philosophy contribute to ethics?. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gromet, D. M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2014). Back into the fold: The influence of offender amends and victim forgiveness on peer reintegration. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(03), 411–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Vintage. New York.Google Scholar
Harris, S. (2011). The moral landscape: How science can determine human values. Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Hayibor, S., & Collins, C. (2016). Motivators of mobilization. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(2), 351–374.Google Scholar
Head, M. L., Holman, L., Lanfear, R., Kahn, A. T., & Jennions, M. D. (2015). The extent and consequences of p-hacking in science. PLoS Biol, 13(3), e1002106.Google Scholar
Kaufman, G. F., & Libby, L. K. (2012). Changing beliefs and behavior through experience-taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(1), 1.Google Scholar
Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
Kohlberg, L. (1976). Moral stages and moralization: the cognitive-developmental approach. Moral development and behavior: theory, research, and social issues, 31–53. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Lavelle, J. J., Folger, R., & Manegold, J. G. (2016). Delivering bad news: How procedural unfairness affects messengers’ distancing and refusals. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(1), 43–55.Google Scholar
Lee, J. S., & Kwak, D. H. (2016). Consumers’ responses to public figures’ transgression: Moral reasoning strategies and implications for endorsed brands. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lomax, R. G., & Hahs-Vaughn, D. L. (2013). An introduction to statistical concepts. Routledge. NY.Google Scholar
Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371.Google Scholar
Mischel, W. (2014). The marshmallow test: understanding self-control and how to master it. NY: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Narvaez, D., & Lapsley, D. K. (2009). Personality, identity, and character: explorations in moral psychology. NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nichols, S. (2004). Sentimental rules: on the natural foundations of moral judgment. NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Niven, K., & Healy, C. (2016). Susceptibility to the ‘dark side’of goal-setting: does moral justification influence the effect of goals on unethical behavior? Journal of Business Ethics, 137(1), 115–127.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R., & Hudson, G. E. (1963). Conjectures and refutations. NY: Routledge Classics.Google Scholar
Prinz, J. (2009). The emotional construction of morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. (2002). The collapse of the fact/value dichotomy and other essays. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Randall, D. M., & Gibson, A. M. (1990). Methodology in business ethics research: a review and critical assessment. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(6), 457–471.Google Scholar
Rieber, R. W., & Robinson, D. K. (2001). Wilhelm Wundt in history: The making of a scientific psychology. NY: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Ries, E. (2011, Oct 19). How Dropbox started As a minimal viable product. Retrieved from https://techcrunch.com/2011/10/19/dropbox-minimal-viable-product/.Google Scholar
Rittenburg, T. L., Gladney, G. A., & Stephenson, T. (2016). The effects of euphemism usage in business contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(2), 315–320.Google Scholar
Schulz, L. E., & Bonawitz, E. B. (2007). Serious fun: Preschoolers engage in more exploratory play when evidence is confounded. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 1045.Google Scholar
Schumann, K., & Dweck, C. S. (2014). Who accepts responsibility for their transgressions? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(12), 1598–1610.Google Scholar
Serenko, A., & Dohan, M. (2011). Comparing the expert survey and citation impact journal ranking methods: Example from the field of artificial intelligence. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 629–648.Google Scholar
Shehu, E., Becker, J. U., Langmaack, A. C., & Clement, M. (2016). The brand personality of nonprofit organizations and the influence of monetary incentives. Journal of Business Ethics, 138(3), 589–600.Google Scholar
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2013), Life after p-hacking, in – Advances in Consumer Research 41, eds. Simona Botti and Aparna Labroo, Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). p-Curve and effect size: correcting for publication bias using only significant results. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 666–681.Google Scholar
Stevens, J. P. (2012). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Routledge. NY.Google Scholar
Suar, D., & Gochhayat, J. (2016). Influence of biological sex and gender roles on ethicality. Journal of Business Ethics, 134(2), 199–208.Google Scholar
Tenbrunsel, A. E., & Smith-Crowe, K. (2008). ethical decision making: Where we’ve been and where we’re going. The Academy of Management Annals, 2(1), 545–607.Google Scholar
Tessman, L. (2014). Moral failure: On the impossible demands of morality. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tonner, A. (2016, Jun 11). Should Dropbox really be worth more than Box Inc.? Retrieved from www.fool.com/investing/2016/06/11/should-dropbox-really-be-worth-more-than-box-inc.aspx.Google Scholar
Warren, D. E., Gaspar, J. P., & Laufer, W. S. (2014). Is formal ethics training merely cosmetic? A study of ethics training and ethical organizational culture. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(01), 85–117.Google Scholar
Werhane, P. H., Hartman, L. P., Moberg, D., Englehardt, E., Pritchard, M., & Parmar, B. (2011). Social constructivism, mental models, and problems of obedience. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 103–118.Google Scholar
Wicks, A. C., & Derry, R. (1996). An evaluation of journal quality: The perspective of business ethics researchers. Business Ethics Quarterly, 6(03), 359–371.Google Scholar
Xu, Z. X., & Ma, H. K. (2016). How can a deontological decision lead to moral behavior? The moderating role of moral identity. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(3), 537–549.Google Scholar
Yam, K. C., & Reynolds, S. J. (2016). The effects of victim anonymity on unethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(1), 13–22.Google Scholar
Zhang, T., Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2014). Morality rebooted: Exploring simple fixes to our moral bugs. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 63–79.Google Scholar