Once Good, Always Good? Testing Nudge’s Spillovers on Pro Environmental Behavior

It is a common assumption to believe that encouraging pro environmental behavior (PEB) in one domain would lead to increased PEB in other domains (best-case scenario) or just be restricted to the initial targeted domain (worst-case scenario). Evidence from a rapidly growing literature on moral licensing suggests that interventions targeting behavioral change could lead to an even worse scenario, with individuals starting to underperform in one domain, as a compensation for their good performance in other domains. We propose to study the dynamic of PEBs when individuals are exposed to a specific nudge (priming) via an original experiment designed to capture actual behavior. We found that priming could increase PEB, but does not thwart moral licensing. Primed individuals end up doing worse than non-primed individual under a moral licensing condition. A more comprehensive view of the mechanisms underlying behavioral change is essential to support sustainable policies.

Confronting Idea Stealers in the Workplace: The Unfortunate Moral Credentialing Granted to Power-Holders

How and when do employees confront one another for stealing their ideas? Business communication literature on confronting unethical behavior is synthesized with moral licensing theory to better understand responses to unethical actors about unjustified credit taking in the workplace. In this message production experiment, working adults ( N = 344) were randomly assigned to respond to a supervisor, peer coworker, or subordinate who stole or ignored the participant’s intellectual contributions. Content and statistical analyses revealed subordinates were comparatively less direct when confronting bosses, suggesting third-party moral licensing and moral credentialing were measurable in communication patterns. Importantly, this dynamic was not attributable to perceptions of task interdependence. Instead, subordinates perceived the stealing or ignoring of their ideas to be less unethical than did bosses. Additionally, individuals whose ideas have been stolen in the workplace were less confrontational compared to those who have not. Thus, data suggest incremental acquiescence to this form of workplace wrongdoing, particularly when the transgressor holds high hierarchical status. Taken together, these data may explain how recognition for ideas tends to spread vertically to bosses (labeled here, vertical credit creep), which may function to reinforce established power arrangements and to perpetuate unjustified credit taking in the workplace.

Failure to replicate moral licensing and moral cleansing in an online experiment

Moral licensing occurs when someone who initially behaved morally or cooperatively, later behaves less morally, as if they had a “license” to act badly. On the flipside, moral cleansing occurs when someone first behaves immorally, which prompts them to later behaves more morally. To-date, few studies have investigated individual differences in the moral licensing and cleansing effects. This paper bridges this gap by investigating how cooperative preferences, as measured by social value orientation (SVO), influence engagement in these effects. We hypothesized that prosocial participants would be less likely to license, but more likely to cleanse. Contrary to predictions, we did not replicate the moral licensing or moral cleansing effects, and cooperative preferences did not influence engagement in the effect. However, checks suggest that our manipulations were successful. We postulate that licensing and cleansing effects are unlikely to be elicited online.

A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: Exploring the Relationship Between Leader Humility and Unethical Behavior

Prior research on the effects of leader humility implies that the more humility the leader exhibits, the greater the positive effect on recipients (e.g., followers and teams). However, little or no attention has so far been paid to the effects on the actors (e.g., leaders), who espouse humble behavior. In response to recent calls to theorize and examine how humility impacts these actors, this research draws on moral licensing theory, adopting an actor-centric approach to examine the mechanisms through which leader humility can lead to unethical behavior, such as unethical behavior for an organization (pseudobeneficial) and unethical behavior toward the organization (detrimental). Ultimately, we propose leader relational accountability as a moderator to mitigate the moral licensing effect of humble leaders. Results from a survey study provide support for the proposed hypotheses.

EXPRESS: Do Backer Affiliations Help or Hurt Crowdfunding Success?

Crowdfunding has emerged as a mechanism to raise funds for entrepreneurial ideas. On crowdfunding platforms, backers (i.e., individuals who fund ideas) jointly fund the same idea, leading to affiliations, or overlaps, within the community. We find that while an increase in the total number of backers may positively affect funding behavior, the resulting affiliations affect funding negatively. We reason that when affiliated others fund a new idea, individuals may feel less of a need to fund, a process known as vicarious moral licensing. Based on data collected from 2,021 ideas on a prominent crowdfunding platform, we show that prior affiliation among backers negatively affects an idea’s funding amount and eventual funding success. Creator engagement (i.e., idea description and updates) and backer engagement (i.e., Facebook shares) moderate this negative effect. The effect of affiliation is robust across several instrumental variables, model specifications, measures of affiliation, and multiple crowdfunding outcomes. Results from three experiments, a survey, and interviews with backers support the negative effect of affiliation and show that it can be explained by vicarious moral licensing. We develop actionable insights for creators to mitigate the negative effects of affiliation with the language used in idea descriptions and updates.

When Good People Sexually Harass: The Role of Power and Moral Licensing on Sexual Harassment Perceptions and Intentions

<p>History has shown that people who embody responsibility-focused power have been credibly accused of sexual harassment (SH). We seek to understand why. Drawing on Power-Approach Theory (Keltner et al., 2003) and moral licensing theory (Effron & Monin, 2010) we present two complementary studies examining how responsibility-focused power triggers moral licensing, which, in turn, decreases perceptions of SH (Study 1) and increases intentions to engage in SH (Study 2). In Study 1, 376 adults read scenarios of a man who embodies responsibility-focused power, egocentric power, or low power and then made moral crediting ratings (a form of moral licensing). Then they read a case where the man had been accused of SH. SH judgments against the responsibility-focused power holder, compared to others, were less severe, and several effects were mediated by moral crediting. In Study 2, 310 adults were primed to experience responsibility-focused power or low power. Responsibility-focused power increased SH intentions through effects on communal feelings and moral crediting. This research develops a new theoretical perspective on why SH occurs and why we deny perceiving it. We provide practical recommendations for abating the effects of power and moral licensing. </p>

When Good People Sexually Harass: The Role of Power and Moral Licensing on Sexual Harassment Perceptions and Intentions

<p>History has shown that people who embody responsibility-focused power have been credibly accused of sexual harassment (SH). We seek to understand why. Drawing on Power-Approach Theory (Keltner et al., 2003) and moral licensing theory (Effron & Monin, 2010) we present two complementary studies examining how responsibility-focused power triggers moral licensing, which, in turn, decreases perceptions of SH (Study 1) and increases intentions to engage in SH (Study 2). In Study 1, 376 adults read scenarios of a man who embodies responsibility-focused power, egocentric power, or low power and then made moral crediting ratings (a form of moral licensing). Then they read a case where the man had been accused of SH. SH judgments against the responsibility-focused power holder, compared to others, were less severe, and several effects were mediated by moral crediting. In Study 2, 310 adults were primed to experience responsibility-focused power or low power. Responsibility-focused power increased SH intentions through effects on communal feelings and moral crediting. This research develops a new theoretical perspective on why SH occurs and why we deny perceiving it. We provide practical recommendations for abating the effects of power and moral licensing. </p>

Rationalizing Inconsistent Consumer Behavior. Understanding Pathways That Lead to Negative Spillover of Pro-environmental Behaviors in Daily Life

Ideally, pro-environmental consumer behavior leads to a lower impact on the environment. However, due to negative behavioral spillovers environmentally friendly behavior could lead to an overall higher environmental impact if subsequent environmentally unfriendly behavior occurs. In this exploratory interview study we focused on two pathways leading to negative spillover: a psychological path (perceived effort, moral licensing) and an economic path (rebound effects). We wanted to gain insight into people’s motivations to behave environmentally unfriendly and to explore people’s level of awareness of both pathways. Our results indicate that pro-environmental behaviors that are associated with higher effort are performed less frequently, and that when people do not perform these behaviors they associate them with higher effort levels. When people perceive behaviors as more effortful they increasingly seem to use arguments to motivate and rationalize why performing the behavior is difficult or impossible. Moreover, we found that although some people can imagine that moral licensing and rebound effects could occur and can provide examples from their own lives, most people assess these concepts as not rational. People seem unaware of the relation between a first pro-environmental behavior (PEB) and a subsequent behavior, and therefore inconsistencies in behavior go unnoticed. As people are good at rationalizing why they do not perform specific PEBs, they in general feel satisfied with their own pro-environmental actions. In order to discourage negative spillovers, we describe a number of approaches and research ideas aimed at taking away the grounds for rationalization.