What’s in it for Me? An Examination of Accounting Students’ Likelihood to Report Faculty Misconduct

Abstract

Since there are so few controls over detecting and preventing faculty misconduct, one of the most common ways in which it is discovered is through student reports (in other words, whistleblowing). Given the importance of student reports in bringing to light faculty’s ethical lapses, this paper seeks to understand what factors influence students’ likelihood to report faculty misconduct. We develop an empirical model that integrates the decision process of the Prosocial Organizational Behavior (POB) Model with insights from the emotional perspective on whistleblowing. Specifically, we use an experimental survey to examine how students’ perceived unfairness of the faculty misconduct, feelings of anger, and the students’ self-interest in the situation in conjunction with situational “cues for inaction” lead to the intention to blow the whistle. Overall, the results from our structural model partially support our theoretical model. Interestingly, these findings demonstrate that, in the case of faculty member misconduct, anger and perceptions of unfairness play a greater role than the more rational cost-benefit process of the POB model. These results could aid in development of ethics education for students and could also inform the development of university policies that encourage students to come forward when faced with faculty misconduct.