Contagion or restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior

By Francesca Gino, Jun Gu, Chen-Bo Zhong. 2009

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Information Systems and Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c43f8e961c1c1653ab5a3e3dd9dbe500c6b968c8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Information Systems and Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Separating Will from Grace: An experiment on conformity and awareness in cheating (2013, background): “In fact, the literature in social psychology (Gino et al. 2009a; Gino et al. 2009b) has shown that cheating is influenced by both the awareness of the act and what peers do in the same situations.”
Blind forces (2014, background): “This work has shown how various factors can lead individuals to make decisions that result in unethical behavior that is either unseen or cognitively reconstrued (see Gino et al., 2009; Messick & Bazerman, 1996; C. Moore & Gino, 2013; Tenbrunsel & Smith-Crowe, 2008, for reviews).”
Ethically adrift: How others pull our moral compass from true North, and how we can fix it (2013, background): “In related research, social comparisons were elicited by differences in resource allocation among individuals, Gino and Pierce (2009) found that participants in laboratory studies were willing to forgo payment in order to punish those they envied.”
Moral Symbols: A Necklace of Garlic against Unethical Requests (2017, background): “Previous research has examined the effects of different contextual factors, organizational ethical culture (Treviño et al., 1998) and peer pressure from unethical coworkers (Ashforth & Anand, 2003; Gino et al., 2009).”
Why Do We Lie? A Practical Guide To The Dishonesty Literature (2018, background): “According to Gino et al. (2009a), the unethical behaviour of peers can influence an observer’s behaviour in different ways.”
Vicarious Dishonesty: When Psychological Closeness Creates Distance from One's Moral Compass (2012, methodology): “For the problem-solving task, participants received a brown envelope that contained 10 dollars (nine one-dollar bills and four quarters) and an empty white envelope, along with two sheets of paper (see Gino et al., 2009a for a similar procedure).”