Testing the effectiveness and endorsement of collective punishment

Corporate accounting scandals continue to crowd news headlines, creating the public perception that unethical and illegal behaviors are the professional norm in accountancy. As a result, perception of accountancy as an honest and reliable profession has been negatively affected. Focusing on perception of unethical accountant behaviors, we compare the same misdeeds committed by accountants and non-accountants. Eighteen short vignettes with unethical behavioral dilemmas were displayed to subjects in different versions accompanied by the image of the person who performed the unethical behavior. Respondents were asked to rate the severity of a set of unethical behaviors. The results indicate that participants extended greater tolerance to violation of ethical work behaviors. However, they treated minor crimes and illegal non-work behaviors with more severity. Gender and attractiveness moderated the connection between occupation and unethical judgment. In the former, participants displayed less tolerance to female accountants. In the latter, they were also less tolerant of attractive accountant misbehaviors. This work sheds needed light on the worrying negative public perception of ethical standards in accountancy. For professionalism to be restored, ethical renewal is critical, and this work represents a step in that direction.

Although the phenomenology of overt or aggressive antisocial behavior during childhood is well-documented, far less is known about covert or non-aggressive, rule-breaking (RB) antisocial behavior. Gaps in knowledge include issues as basic as RB's typical symptom presentation during childhood and which symptoms differ across sex. The current study sought to fill these gaps in the literature by establishing the prevalence and psychometric properties of specific RB behaviors in a sample of 1022 twin boys and 1010 twin girls between the ages of 6 and 10years. Legal RB behaviors (e.g., breaking rules, swears, lying or cheating) were present to varying degrees in most children, regardless of whether or not they passed the clinical threshold for RB. They were also more common in boys than in girls regardless of their clinical status. In sharp contrast, illegal RB behaviors (e.g., stealing, vandalism, setting fires) were rarely observed in typically-developing children, but were seen at moderate levels in boys and girls with clinically-significant levels of RB. Moreover, sex differences in illegal RB behaviors were observed only for those youth with clinically meaningful levels of RB. Such findings collectively imply that while legal RB behaviors can be found (albeit at different frequencies) in children with and without clinically meaningful levels of RB, illegal RB behaviors may function as relatively 'unambiguous' indicator of clinically-significant levels of RB.

Objective To explore the factors in frequency and degree of risk behavior in adolescents,as well find the way to cope with adolescent mental health. Methods 1369 middle students and college students were measured by Risky Behavior Questionnaire for Adolescents (RBQ-A) ,and analyzed the data. Results (1) There were statistically significant among the different age in difference of risky behaviors except aggressive and/or violent behaviors. Males scored higher than females in unsafe sexual practices, aggressive and/or violent behaviors, dangerous,destructive,and/or illegal behaviors,alcohol and/or drug use and smoking(P<0.05 orP<0.01). Students in city scored higher than rural students in dangerous,destructive,and/or illegal behaviors and alcohol and/or drug use(P<0.05 or P< 0.01). Families with high income scored higher than low income in unsafe sexual practices and rule breaking(P< 0.05 or P< 0.01). Families with low income scored higher than high income residences in dangerous,destructive,and/or illegal behaviors and alcohol and/or drug use(P < 0.05 or P < 0.01). (2) The significant differences were existed in unsafe sexual practices,aggressive and/or violent behaviors,dangerous, destructive,and/or illegal behaviors,alcohol and/or drug use and smoking between males and females (P<0.05 or P<0.01).The significant differences were existed in dangerous,destructive,and/or illegal behaviors and alcohol and/or drug use between groups of 16 years old and 14 ～ 15 years old (P < 0. 05 or P < 0. 01). The significant differences were existed in dangerous,destructive,and/or illegal behaviors between urban and rural students (P< 0.05 orP<0.01).The significant differences were existed in total scores in gender and urban and rural(P<0.05 or P<0.01). Conclusion The significant differences are existed in rate of risky behaviors in gender,age,urban and rural. But there is different degree existed in it. Key words: Risky behaviors; Adolescent; Psychological measurement

In 1959, Frank Serpico joined the New York City police force. For Serpico, the police had always represented the meshing of authority and service. His early days on the force propelled him into the conflict between the norms governing police behavior set by department regulations and the actual code generated by the police. Formal regulations precluded the taking of any items from neighorhood stores and sanctioned the acceptance of bribes. In the station house and out on patrol a different set of rules applied. Shopping for items of food at local stores was clearly acceptable and taking money to pardon a lawbreaker became standard fare. Serpico was caught in a dilemma that faces many rookie police. Which set of norms should he uphold?' Like many other whistleblowers in industry, government, and the academic world, initially Serpico was caught between his desire to follow his moral beliefs, and the organizational pressures to conform. How do workers handle such a conflict? And what happens to their personal lives and their careers once they have blown the whistle? In an effort to understand the dynamics of the process, I have interviewed or exchanged letters with nine prominent whistleblowers and have corresponded with the wife of a tenth, who is deceased.' Their cases portray three distinct paths through which individuals move toward public disclosure: Unbending resisters protest within the organization about unethical or illegal behavior that they have observed. They maintain a strict commitment to their principles, despite efforts to cajole or coerce them. Ultimately, as a consequence of neglect and retaliation within the organization, they take a public stand. Implicated protestors speak out within their organizations, but acquiesce when they are ordered to conform. They find themselves drawn into illegal or unethical behavior, which they expose when they fear legal liability. Reluctant collaborators become deeply involved in acts they privately condemn. They seek public remedy and personal expiation only when they leave the organization. Once an employee has blown the whistle, the responses of his or her superiors can take two broad forms. There are degradation to punish and alienate resisters and protesters; and ceremonies of status elevation, which reinforce the whistleblower's feeling that what he or she is doing is right. Whether and when someone will blow the

With substantial inquiry concerning what individual Enron directors and officers knew, or what they should have known based on what they knew, little attention has been directed to examining the institutional structure at Enron that may have spawned the unethical behavior and to assessing responsibility for that structure. By institutional structure, I refer to Enron's ethical climate which is a manifestation of its culture. Corporate culture is defined as a complex set of common beliefs and expectations held by members of the organization which are based on shared values, assumptions, attitudes and norms. The corporation's ethical climate refers to the ethical meaning attached by employees to organizational policies, practices and procedures. These policies, practices and procedures influence moral awareness, the criteria used in decision making, whether morals will have priority over other values, and moral behavior. Important to ascertaining corporate culture are the employees' perceptions of the corporation's values as reflect by the corporation's mission statement and code of ethics, the criteria for business decisions, the words and actions of leaders, the handling of conflicts of interest, the reward system, the guidance provided to employees concerning dealing with ethical issues, and the monitoring system. This article is a preliminary examination of the factual predicates for placing responsibility on the corporation and its directors and officers for a corporate climate that encourages and supports unethical and illegal behavior. This article explores (1) whether climates contribute to illegal behavior within corporations, (2) whether corporate climates can be ascertained, (3) whether some corporate climates can be identified that have a greater likelihood of fostering illegal conduct than others, and (4) whether climates can either be modified to encourage and support legal behavior or, if not, whether steps can be taken to decrease the likelihood of illegal behavior in such climates. Ultimately, the questions concerning Enron are: What was its corporate climate and did that climate contribute to the unethical behavior of its employees? If so, what was the responsibility of Enron and its officers and directors to ascertain, monitor, and modify that climate? This article will respond to the call by the Advisory Group to the U.S. Sentencing Commission to consider whether the Federal Sentencing Guidelines should encourage organizations to foster ethical cultures to ensure compliance with the intent as well as the letter of the law, and if so, to consider how an organization's performance in this regard can be measured or evaluated. This article will also consider the effectiveness of provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that require the SEC to promulgate rules and regulations requiring corporations to disclose whether or not they have a code of ethics for senior financial officers, and any waivers of such code, and provisions of the NYSE proposed rules promulgated to meet these requirements. Additionally, this article will raise the issues as to whether corporations and their directors and officers who sign the corporation's disclosure statements have an obligation to disclose their corporations' unethical climate and whether they breach their fiduciary duty to the corporation when they fail to take steps to discover, or to act when confronted with, their corporation's unethical climate.

This study explores effective penalty strategies to reduce student tardiness. In this study, we compare the effects of individual punishment, collective punishment, and collective punishment with exemptions for latecomers. The data is collected from 220 students from different age (primary school to college by an online survey, and three experimental treatments were designed: T1 (individual fine of 8 CNY), T2 (collective fine of 8 CNY for the entire class), and T3 (collective fine of 8 CNY exempting latecomers). Then, a regression model used to analyze the impact of penalty types on tardiness probability. Results show that T3 (selective punishment) is most effective, reducing predicted tardiness to the lowest mean (11.55%) by imposing fines on non-late students, thereby intensifying social guilt among latecomers and preventing monetary compensation from neutralizing moral pressure. T2 (collective punishment) ranks second (mean 15.67%) through shared economic costs and peer monitoring. However, T1 (individual fines) proves counterproductive, since it convert tardiness into a "transactional behavior" and increasing tardiness probability (mean 21.92%). The study validates the interaction between penalty mechanisms and psychological perceptions, and demonstrates that selective punishment alters behavior more effectively by amplifying social norm pressure rather than economic costs. This research can offer practical insights for educational system. Schools may implement a "collective liability system" to reduce students tardiness behavior, instead of only punishing the individual who arrives late, because it may cause a counter expect impact.

SummaryPro‐customer rule breaking refers to employees' breaking of organizational rules with the primary intention of helping customers or providing better customer service. In spite of its prosocial nature, it is unclear whether and how pro‐customer rule breaking also benefits employees who engage in this behavior. Drawing on self‐determination theory, we examine employees' well‐being and voice at work as outcomes of pro‐customer rule breaking. Across a simulation study and a critical incident‐based survey study, we found that pro‐customer rule breaking was positively related to employee psychological need fulfillment, which, in turn, was associated with lower emotional exhaustion, higher job satisfaction, and increased voice. Furthermore, normative conflict with organizational rule moderated the positive relationship between pro‐customer rule breaking and psychological need fulfillment such that employees with high normative conflict with organizational rule (i.e., employee perception that their existing organizational rule results in inefficiency and that their organization could be much better if it changed its practices) benefited more from their pro‐customer rule breaking. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings and offer directions for future research.

Faculty, students, and staff experience sexual harassment in the workplace and educational environment. Frequently, the victim takes no action either due to a lack of understanding of their rights or concern about retaliation or adverse outcomes if an incident is reported. The #MeToo movement has enhanced awareness of sexual harassment and its impact on victims. However, dental institutions vary in their approach to creating an environment free from harassment and supportive of individuals subject to inappropriate or illegal behaviors. In this article, four vignettes provide examples of harassment, mistreatment, or bias. Common themes and critical issues within the vignettes are then identified, discussing the potentially illegal, unethical, inappropriate, and unprofessional behaviors and comments. Strategies to address the issues identified are described. Recommendations are also provided to assist dental institutions and educators in evaluating their current practices and policies and implementing change.

In custodial interrogations, suspects tend to give disproportionate weight to immediate outcomes relative to future outcomes when deciding whether to confess or deny guilt. The current research examined whether the perceived (un)certainty of an immediate outcome influences suspects' short-sighted confession decisions. We hypothesized that suspects are more likely to make short-sighted confession decisions when an immediate punishment is certain versus uncertain and that the effects of a certain immediate punishment become stronger the longer suspects are interrogated. Using the repetitive question paradigm, college student participants (N = 164, 57% women, 87% Caucasian, M age 18.9 years) admitted or denied 20 illegal and unethical behaviors in an interview. Participants' admissions and denials received either an immediate punishment (answering repetitive questions) or a future punishment (meeting with a police officer in several weeks to discuss their misconduct). In addition, we manipulated participants' perceptions of the immediate punishment to be either certain or uncertain. Participants showed greater short-sightedness in their admission decisions when they perceived the immediate punishment to be certain versus uncertain. Moreover, the influence of the certain immediate punishment on participants' admission decisions tended to increase over time. These findings provide empirical evidence that the certainty of immediate outcomes may contribute to suspects' shorted-sighted confession decisions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

By flagging the most common ethical traps in modern business, this chapter helps businesspeople to understand how practical ethical problems arise and why it can be difficult to act ethically. There is an important line to be drawn in the business world between legitimate self-interested behavior, and unethical and/or illegal behavior. Questions include: How are most unethical behaviors caught? What are some of the most common unethical business behaviors? What patterns do common unethical business behaviors take? What is the ethical slide? When are you crossing the line into your own ethical slide? How can I handle peer pressure and negative reaction to halting my ethical slide? How do I speak up when I need to challenge unethical behavior?

Collective punishment has a notorious reputation among moral philosophers. If we take it to mean the imposition of punitive measures on groups (I elaborate on this meaning later in the chapter), collective punishment raises two normative issues that many philosophers find particularly troubling. The first concerns the extent to which groups are the appropriate subjects of punishment. Here the question is, are groups moral agents that are responsible for their actions and should be held to account when they act wrongly? The second difficulty concerns the impact of collective punishment on group members . Here the question is, is it justified to impose burdens on individuals by virtue of the fact that their group caused a collective harm? To see these problems more clearly, consider the proposed academic boycott against Israeli universities (the subject of heated debates in recent years in British academia). Briefly, the proponents of the boycott recommend the elimination of professional ties with Israeli academic institutions, in light of the latter's alleged support of the Israeli government policies. However, does it make sense to argue that academic institutions act in a condemnable manner? Are institutions themselves the proper subject of moral reactions such as anger, resentment, or condemnation? Moreover, even if it can be shown that Israeli academic institutions acted in a way that merits condemnation, boycotting them will harm the individual academics who work in those institutions. Can this distributive effect be justified?

Like ethnic cleansing, retaliatory or collective punishment is a subject of International humanitarian law and contrary to International and domestic legislations.This paper focuses on the startling findings of two recent human rights violation reports by Amnesty international and along with it the requirement of an ethical corporate stance that must be taken by a multinational manufacturer of bulldozers.Two recent February 2024 Reports by Amnesty International’s research exposes that Indian authorities in the states of Assam, Delhi, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh have carried out targeted demolitions as deterrent punishment against Muslims people’s homes, business and places for worship for allegedly participating in protests and communal violence. Such forced evictions and collective and arbitrary punishment, impact the rights to adequate housing, livelihood, life and liberty and fair trial of many, including men, women, children and elderly persons. The demolitions were carried out by the respective state authorities without any prior consultation, adequate notice, and alternative resettlement opportunities. Demolitions were also discriminatory ,causing the displacement and dispossession of Muslims, creating unbearable living conditions for the larger Muslim community and sustaining stigmatization and criminalization of Muslims. No relief or compensation has been made by the state authorities for affected parties. Victims who have initiated legal action in Indian courts are continuing their legal battles. No one worried about the effects of such collective punishment on women, children and families.

Whistleblowing serves as a critical mechanism for promoting transparency and accountability in Malaysia, particularly in the fight against unethical or illegal behaviour such as corruption. This article explores the legal framework surrounding whistleblowing in Malaysia, focusing on the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. It examines the legal protections afforded to whistleblowers, including laws designed to prevent retaliation and encourage reporting of unethical or illegal behaviours. Additionally, the article explores the role of the enforcement agencies in facilitating and safeguarding whistleblowing activities. This article applied qualitative study by analysing the effectiveness of these legal provisions and institutional support systems. The article offers insights into the effectiveness of the whistleblowing practices in Malaysia. The article concludes with recommendations for strengthening legal protections to better protect those who expose unethical behaviour particularly corruption, emphasizing the need for continued legal reform to ensure whistleblowers can contribute effectively to upholding accountability and transparency in Malaysia.

COMMUNITY-BASED AND RESTORATIVE-JUSTICE INTERVENTIONS TO REDUCE OVER-POLICING

When and how can organizational punishment stop unethical pro-organizational behaviors in hospitality?