scholarly journals Erratum: Bribery and the Role of Public Service Motivation and Social Value Orientation: A Multi-Site Experimental Study in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Study ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Public Service Motivation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation

scholarly journals Bribery and the Role and Social Value Orientation: A Multi-Site Experimental Study in Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lode De Waele ◽  
Kristina S. Weißmüller ◽  
Arjen van Witteloostuijn
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
The Other ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Complex Phenomenon ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Survey Measure

Bribery is a complex phenomenon rooted in both individual motives and the greater institutional context. Experimental research into causal mechanisms that drive bribing behavior is still scarce. To date, there is no empirical evidence on how the society-regarding motivational survey measure of Public Service Motivation (PSM) and the other-oriented motivational measure of Social Value Orientation (SVO) can help explain why some people are more susceptible to engage in the act of bribing than others. Based on a multi-site triple-replication, and a vignette-based research design, quasi-experimental evidence from Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands shows that both measures interact and that—paradoxically—people with higher SVO are more likely to be willing to engage in bribery.

Individuele verschillen in graaigedrag

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maaike Jongenelen ◽  
Roos Vonk
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
High Power ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Equal Share ◽  
Power Scale ◽  
Role Playing Game

Individual differences in money-grabbing: The role of entitlement, social value orientation, and misuse of power Individual differences in money-grabbing: The role of entitlement, social value orientation, and misuse of power M. Jongenelen & R. Vonk, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 369-381 This research investigates the role of individual differences in money-grabbing. Feelings of entitlement, high scores on the Misuse of Power scale and a pro-self focus were expected to lead to grabbing behaviour in high-power individuals. While playing a manager in a role-playing game, participants had the opportunity to grab more valuable points then their equal share. Results showed that pro-self participants grabbed more than pro-socials. Among the pro-self participants, feelings of entitlement led to higher Misuse of Power scores which, in turn, led to more grabbing. Entitlement en Misuse of Power had no effect on grabbing in pro-socials. It is concluded that power does not corrupt absolutely: Individual differences predict how a powerful person will behave. Implications for business settings are dealt with in the discussion.

How Incomplete Information of Team Member Contributions Affects Subsequent Contributions: The Moderating Role of Social Value Orientation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler F. Thomas ◽  
Todd A. Thornock
Keyword(s):  
Team Member ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Input Information ◽  
Team Project ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Output Information

In this study, we investigate how team members' social value orientation (SVO) affects their contributions to a team project when different types of information about other team members' effort is known. Specifically, we examine the team contributions made by proselfs and prosocials after they learn either the input provided or output achieved by other team members. Proselfs subsequently contributed less following input information compared to output information because they can use input information opportunistically to justify their own lower contributions. Conversely, prosocials contributed more after receiving input information compared to output information because they perceive input information as being more psychologically meaningful. Finally, proself teams with output information perform similarly to prosocial teams with either type of information. These findings provide insight into how information about team member contributions and SVO affect individuals' subsequent team contributions, and how output information can help mitigate proselfs' free-riding tendencies and improve team performance.

Establishing cooperation in a mixed-motive social dilemma. An fMRI study investigating the role of social value orientation and dispositional trust

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Griet Emonds ◽  
Carolyn H. Declerck ◽  
Christophe Boone ◽  
Ruth Seurinck ◽  
Rik Achten
Keyword(s):  
Social Dilemma ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Fmri Study ◽  
Dispositional Trust

Aggression as a Motive for Gossip During Conflict: The Role of Power, Social Value Orientation, and Counterpart's Behavior

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 137-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emile Jeuken ◽  
Bianca Beersma ◽  
Femke S. ten Velden ◽  
Maria T. M. Dijkstra
Keyword(s):  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation

WHAT PRICE DO YOU ASK FOR THE “EXTRA ONE”?: A SOCIAL VALUE ORIENTATION PERSPECTIVE

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chien-Huang Lin ◽  
Hung-Ming Lin
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Study ◽  
Cooperative Behavior ◽  
Market Price ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Lower Price ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
The Social

The concept of social value orientation was used to explore individuals' decisions in asking price when they had an “extra one” that someone wanted to buy. Results from an experimental study indicated that competitors' asking price was higher than those of individualists, who in turn asked higher prices than did prosocials. Regardless of the social value orientation, participants charged a significantly lower price for the “extra one” if the buyer was a friend rather than a stranger. In addition, for prosocials, market price was not an important consideration when they decided the asking price, and they exhibited cooperative behavior only under the situation of no loss.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document