Account-giving for a corporate transgression influences moral judgment: When those who "spin" condone harm-doing

    Authors

    V. S. Folkes;Y. O. Whang

    Abbreviated Journal Title

    J. Appl. Psychol.

    Keywords

    VICTIM; Psychology, Applied; Management

    Abstract

    Generating some types of accounts-justifications, excuses, or apologies-for an organization's harm-doing increases condoning of a transgression compared with generating denials or not having to explain a transgression. In Experiment 1, students (N = 324) were required either to explain a corporation's use of child labor to manufacture its products or merely to read about it. Explaining decreased condemnation of the offense compared with when no explanation was required. In Experiment 2, students (N = 101) either justified the corporation's harm-doing or denied that the corporation had harmed employees, with justifications increasing condoning more than denials. In Experiment 3, students (N = 113) either wrote an apology or wrote a denial, with apologizers condoning harm-doing more than deniers. Differences appear to be due to some accounts eliciting cognitive elaboration on the misdeed.

    Journal Title

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    Volume

    88

    Issue/Number

    1

    Publication Date

    1-1-2003

    Document Type

    Article

    Language

    English

    First Page

    79

    Last Page

    86

    WOS Identifier

    WOS:000181465100008

    ISSN

    0021-9010

    Share

    COinS