The rationalizing animal: Moral disengagement and ethical decision making

Purpose: Research in behavioral ethics has focused on factors allowing individuals to act unethically without feeling distress. Moral disengagement describes how we persuade ourselves that ethical standards do not apply to oneself in a specific situation. It consists of a set of 8 interrelated self-serving biases. This paper considers the implications of moral disengagement on ethical decision making in an organizational context. Method/Findings: Two experimental studies evaluated the efficacy of interventions to curb the influence of moral disengagement. In Study 1 (N=55), a direct approach training individuals to recognize moral disengagement opportunities in everyday ethical scenarios did not reduce their propensity to engage in unethical behavior. Study 2 (N=501) explored an indirect, low-pressure approach that primed an individualist or collectivist mindset. Inducing an individualist mindset fostered more reduction in moral disengagement than a collectivist mindset (particularly amongst female participants), but the change in moral disengagement was insignificant. These findings are extended in a 3rd study (N=462) involving a field survey to test a theoretical framework examining the influence of situational factors and individual differences on ethical decision making. Practical Implications: Interventions to mitigate self-serving biases that impede accurate evaluations of our actions in an organizational context are considered. Originality: We are not the rational animals that we’d like to think we are. The human brain seems pre-wired for self-justification and dissonance reduction. Moreover, changing beliefs about our behavior is difficult, and changing them for the worse may be impossible. However, by fostering a culture of consideration and respect, human systems, including organizations, can improve the ethicality of decision making at the individual and group level.