Deontological and Consequentialist Ethics and Attitudes Towards Corruption: A Survey Data Analysis

被引:0
作者
Adrián Megías
Luís de Sousa
Fernando Jiménez-Sánchez
机构
[1] University of Murcia,
[2] Instituto de Ciências Sociais,undefined
[3] Universidade de Lisboa,undefined
[4] University of Murcia,undefined
来源
Social Indicators Research | 2023年 / 170卷
关键词
Corruption; Deontology; Consequentialism; Tolerance; Attitudes; Profiles;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Much of the empirical research on corruption for the past 45 years has focused on perception-based definitions and measurements. Citizens’ perceptions, their attitudes and (self)reported experiences of corruption have been widely studied through different perception-based measures obtained in surveys, interviews, and experiments applied to citizens in general, and experts, business leaders, politicians, or public officials. Notwithstanding the significant progress made to understand the complexity of citizens’ understandings, judgements and practices, we are still unable to decipher by what criteria they establish what is or is not corruption and what types of corruption are susceptible of being condemned/tolerated. This paper makes an innovative contribution to fill this gap. We propose a methodological design to identify and measure different perception-based definitions of corruption based on two contrasting normative perspectives: deontological and consequentialist ethics. We identified four groups: the Virtuous; the Intransigent; the Pragmatic; and the Hypocrite. Using survey data from a national sample of Portuguese citizens, we employ discriminant analysis and logistic regression models to differentiate individual profiles in terms of process- and outcome-based social definitions of corruption and explore the explanatory factors that account for these different conceptualisations and their different degree of tolerance towards corruption.
引用
收藏
页码:507 / 541
页数:34
相关论文
共 102 条
  • [1] Amini C(2020)Corruption and life satisfaction in transition: Is corruption a social norm y Eastern Europe? Social Indicators Research 151 723-766
  • [2] Douarin E(2016)Corruption, fairness and inequality International Political Science Review 38 349-362
  • [3] Ariely G(2005)Politicians, the public and political ethics: Worlds apart Canadian Journal of Political Science 38 1003-1028
  • [4] Uslaner E(1985)Do we need a code of conduct for politicians? The search for an elite political culture of corruption in Canada Canadian Journal of Political Science 18 459-480
  • [5] Atkinson MM(1966)The effects of corruption in a developing nation The Western Political Quarterly 19 719-732
  • [6] Bierling G(2005)Percevoir et Juger la « corruption politique Revue Française De Science Politique 55 757-786
  • [7] Atkinson MM(1997)Corruption networks, transaction security and illegal social exchange Political Studies 45 463-476
  • [8] Mancuso M(2017)An insider-outsider theory of popular tolerance for corrupt politicians Governance 30 67-84
  • [9] Bayley DH(2013)Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision-making: A process dissociation approach Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104 216-235
  • [10] Bezes P(2008)“I don't bribe, I just pull strings”: assessing the fluidity of social representations of corruption in portuguese society Perspectives on European Politics and Society 9 8-23