Citation

Skowronek SE. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2022; 48: e101456.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101456

PMID

36103803

Abstract

Strategies to mitigate dishonesty have met with limited success, leading behavioral ethics scholars to call for a deeper understanding of the psychological mechanisms underlying dishonesty. In this article, I introduce a conceptual framework, DENIAL, that identifies four fundamental mechanisms, or justifications, which provide people a rationale to consider themselves as ethical while acting unethically. I derive these justifications from a review of scholarship within cognate fields, drawing on Moral Disengagement Theory and Neutralization Theory. I identify the victim (they Deserve it), the situation (I blame my Environment), the harm (I cause No Injury), and the social relationship (I have other ALlegiances) as fundamental justifications for dishonesty. I discuss how future mitigation strategies might harness these justifications to improve their efficacy.

Language: en

Keywords

Intervention; Deception; Dishonesty; Ethical decision making; Justification; Moral Disengagement Theory; Neutralization Theory; Nudge; Unethical behavior