08832323.2010.502913
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action in
Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative
Influence and Ethical Judgment
Kevin Celuch & Andy Dill
To cite this article: Kevin Celuch & Andy Dill (2011) An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned
Action in Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative Influence and Ethical Judgment,
Journal of Education for Business, 86:4, 201-207, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
Published online: 21 Apr 2011.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 319
View related articles
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:16
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 86: 201–207, 2011
C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright
ISSN: 0883-2323
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action in
Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative
Influence and Ethical Judgment
Kevin Celuch and Andy Dill
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
University of Southern Indiana, Evansville, Indiana, USA
The moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent on the discrete actions of individuals. The authors address the scholarly and managerial imperative of how individuals
combine various cognitions in their ethical decision making. The study extends the understanding of ethical decision making by exploring relationships among Theory of Reasoned
Action–relevant constructs. Specifically, the authors examined a model that included an expansion of normative influence to include a behavioral norm and an ethical judgment construct
as proximal to intention. To their knowledge, these relationships had not been simultaneously explored in the business ethics literature. Responses from a multidisciplinary student
sample to 2 ethical scenarios were examined with structural equation modeling and largely
support-hypothesized relationships. Results hold implications for future theory, research, and
management of individual-level ethical decision making.
Keywords: ethical decisions, ethical judgment, theory of reasoned action
Over the past four decades, ethical behavior in business
has been the focus of researchers across multiple disciplines. While various players have been implicated in ethical transgressions over this time, the real story relates to
the damage to individuals, organizations, industries, and perhaps economies, particularly in light of the recent subprime
mortgage fiasco. In response to unethical conduct, regulatory and policy initiatives at the level of organizations and
industries have been promulgated and implemented and more
are sure to follow, yet, as recognized by Lagace, Dahlstrom,
and Gassenheimer (1991), the moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent on the discrete actions of individuals. Indeed, Haytko (2004), in exploring organizational
relationships, observed that it is difficult for employees to
think in terms of relationships between firms without thinking of relationships between individuals. In order to effectively prepare individuals to assume roles as responsible
business professionals, it is important for business educators and corporate trainers to understand the nature of ethical
decisions so that enhanced curriculum and training can be
Correspondence should be addressed to Kevin Celuch, University
of Southern Indiana, College of Business, 8600 University Boulevard,
Evansville, IN 47712, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
developed to improve ethical decision making. Thus, understanding individual-level ethical conduct in business contexts
is a continuing imperative.
Two important themes embedded in literature aimed at
understanding individual-level ethical decision making and
behavior relate to (a) the need for theory-driven, programmatic research (cf. Gibson & Frakes, 1997; Hunt & Vitell,
1986); and (b) the need for developing an understanding that
moves beyond mere knowledge of rules or facts to a more
nuanced perspective of how individuals weigh and combine
various elements of experience related to ethical reasoning
(cf. Anderson, 1997; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989).
One approach that has received attention in the business
ethics literature is grounded in social psychological perspectives that explain intention and behavior (Ajzen, 1985,
1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). A clear strength of this approach is that it combines well-grounded theory that explains
how individual-level cognitions combine to determine intention and behavior with the potential for practical, problemrelevant interventions based on the theory. Insights gained
from the use of these models attests to their potential for increasing our understanding of ethical intention and behavior
in business contexts (Buchan, 2005; Carpenter & Reimers,
2005; Cherry, 2006; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989; Gibson &
Frakes, 1997).
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
202
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
The present study extends this line of research in three
ways. We echo the admonition related to the need for theorybased, programmatic research. To this end, we explored a
variant of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) that proposes two theoretical extensions to applications of the model
in the ethical domain. Literature in the area raises theoretical
issues with respect to variables that might further researchers’
understanding of the determinants of behavioral intentions
and ultimately behavior. One issue relates to the expansion
of normative influence to include a behavioral norm in addition to a subjective norm; a second issue relates to the
addition of an ethical judgment construct to the TRA model.
In the next section of the article, we briefly review the
theoretical model that is the foundation of this research. We
describe the specific model to be tested along with justification for proposed constructs and relationships. Then, we
provide an overview of the methodology of the study and then
present the findings. In final section we discuss results and
address theoretical, research, and managerial implications.
Theory of Reasoned Action
The TRA (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975)
places intention as the immediate antecedent of behavior,
and thus the stronger the intention the more likely the occurrence of the corresponding behavior. Determining intention
are attitude and subjective norm. The attitude component is
composed of beliefs, the perceived likelihood of particular
consequences of the behavior, weighted by an evaluation
of the consequences. The subjective norm component is conceptualized as normative beliefs, the perceived pressure from
salient referents, weighted by the motivation to comply with
the referents. The TRA has received support across a range of
contexts (cf. Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Sheppard, Hartwick,
& Warshaw, 1988). The TRA was developed to deal with
behaviors that are under an individual’s volitional control
(Ajzen, 1988; Fishbein, 1993).
Ajzen (1988, 1991) proposed an extension to the TRA—a
perceived behavioral control construct. Perceived behavioral
control relates to the ease or difficulty of performing a behavior in which an individual’s volitional control may be called
into question. Additionally, calls have been renewed for the
exploration of additional constructs that might expand these
models (Conner & Armitage, 1998).
A Conceptual Extension of the Theory of
Planned Behavior for Ethical Decision Making
Figure 1 depicts a model adapted from the TRA that integrates constructs from related attitudinal and ethical decision
making literature. In the model, intention to engage in an
ethically questionable action is determined by the attitude
toward the act, the subjective norm toward the act, the behavioral norm toward the act, and an ethical judgment with
respect to the act. The attitude, subjective norm, and behavioral norm components are viewed as immediate antecedents
Attitude
Subjective
Norm
Ethical
Judgment
Behavioral
Intention
Behavioral
Norm
FIGURE 1 A conceptual extension of the theory of reasoned action for
ethical decision making.
of the ethical judgment. The ethical judgment and the subjective and behavioral norms are also posited to directly affect
behavioral intention. Justification for specific hypotheses developed from relevant literature follows.
Attitude, subjective norm, and intention related to the act
are the foundation of the TRA. These constructs have been
featured prominently in prior research in the ethical decisionmaking domain and are thus included in the present research
as relevant antecedents (attitude and subjective norm) and
outcome (intention) variables (cf. Buchan, 2005; Carpenter
& Reimers, 2005; Cherry, 2006; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989;
Gibson & Frakes, 1997).
Although most of the research utilizing intention models
has included a subjective norm (i.e., an individual’s view
about what significant others think the individual should do
in a given context), discussion has been raised regarding
the concept of a behavioral norm (i.e., an individual’s belief
about what others are doing in a given context) as an independent predictor in attitude models (Kashima & Gallois, 1993).
Care in selecting the appropriate normative constructs is in
keeping with Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) caution against
insufficient consideration of the social context of attitudes
and intentions as well as with reviews related to intention
models highlighting the need for consideration of normative
influences beyond subjective norms (Godin & Kok, 1996;
Sheppard et al., 1988).
Indeed, research related to ethical decision making points
to the potential significance of behavioral norms. For example, Ferrell and Gresham (1985) explicitly included the
influence from associating or interacting with others who are
acting unethically in their model of ethical decision making. Gibson and Frakes (1997), in exploring unethical decision making by CPAs, included a question as to what other
CPAs would do in the situation. Of those reporting questionable conduct, significant percentages also reported they
believed others would perform the unethical act. In testing an
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
intention model, Buchan (2005) included an ethical climate
construct that could include the notion of how others within
the organization are behaving in situations involving ethical
content. This perspective is also consistent with the thinking of Trevino (1986), who suggested that job context and
culture were aspects influencing ethical decision making in
organizations. Given the previous discussion, we believe the
behavioral norm concept may be particularly relevant to understanding ethical decision making, as individuals are likely
to look to the behavior of relevant others in their environment
for input regarding appropriate conduct.
Prior efforts to extend the intention models in ethical decision contexts have included ethical sensitivity and ethical
judgment components of Rest’s (1983) model. The thinking underlying such efforts relates to an attempt to integrate aspects of moral reasoning theory (Kohlberg, 1969;
Rest, 1983) within intention models. Of relevance to the
present research are findings that did not support relationships between ethical sensitivity and intentions or ethical
reasoning (Buchan, 2005; Chan & Leung, 2006). In contrast,
Cherry (2006) found a strong relationship between ethical
judgment and intention. Justification for the addition of an
ethical judgment construct as a proximal antecedent to intention in the present research is based on its central role in
a number of ethical frameworks (cf. Hunt & Vitell, 1986;
Rest, 1983, 1986). Specifically, Hunt and Vitell as well as
Cherry placed ethical judgment as an immediate antecedent
to intention. Hunt and Vitell’s model conceives of consequences and their evaluation and important stakeholders as
antecedents to ethical judgments. Similarly, Cherry proposed
and found support for attitudinal and normative influence on
ethical judgment. Literature related to normative influence
in consumer and business contexts has linked its effects to
judgment processes (i.e., risk reduction) in decision making (cf. Bearden, Netemeyer, & Teel, 1989; Cannon, Achrol,
& Gundlach, 2000). Therefore, we proposed the following
hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1 (H 1 ): Attitude toward the act would be significantly related to the ethical judgment of the act.
Specifically, strong (weak) perceptions of negative consequences associated with the act would be associated
with the judgment of the act as unethical (ethical).
H 2 : Subjective norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the ethical judgment. That is, perceptions that
important referents disagree (agree) with the questionable action would be associated with the judgment of
the act as unethical (ethical).
H 3 : Behavioral norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the ethical judgment. That is, perceptions that
relevant referents do (not) engage in the questionable
act would be associated with the judgment of the act as
ethical (unethical).
Subjective and behavioral norms should have direct influence on intention. Cherry (2006) found support for the in-
203
fluence of subjective norms on ethical intention. Behavioral
norms have also been found to be independent predictors of
intention and behavior (cf. Kashima & Gallois, 1993; Nucifora, Gallois, & Kashima, 1993). In addition, the impact
of normative influence on the adoption of harmful behavior
is well established (cf. Chassin, Presson, Sherman, Corty,
& Olsavsky, 1984; Kandel, 1980; McAllister, Krosnick, &
Milburn, 1984). Taken together, results point to the direct
influence of norms on ethical intention. Therefore, we proposed the following hypotheses:
H 4 : Subjective norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention with respect to the
ethical act. That is, perceptions that important referents agree (disagree) with the questionable action would
be associated with the intention to (not) engage in the
act.
H 5 : Behavioral norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention. That is, perceptions
that relevant referents do (not) engage in the questionable
act would be associated with the intention to (not) engage
in the act.
Last, Hunt and Vitell (1986) and Cherry (2006) conceived
of ethical judgment as an immediate antecedent to intention.
Cherry found a strong relationship between ethical judgment
and intention. Therefore, we posited the following hypothesis:
H 6 : The ethical judgment of the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention. Specifically, the judgment of the act as ethical (unethical) would be associated
with the intention to (not) engage in the act.
METHOD
Sample and Procedure
Participants were 348 students enrolled in introductory accounting classes at a medium-sized Midwestern university.
Given that the course is a requirement in the business core,
the resultant sample was multidisciplinary in composition.
Individuals in each class were randomly assigned one of two
ethical scenarios along with a measurement questionnaire.
Students were instructed to read the vignette and then to
answer the questionnaire.
Ethical scenarios are used extensively in business ethics
research (cf. Buchan, 2005; Chonko & Hunt, 1985; Cohen,
Pant, & Sharp, 1995, 2001). As a category of stimulus materials, scenarios combine the benefits of standardization and
mundane realism (Cherry, 2006). The specific scenarios used
in the present study were used in prior ethical research (Cohen et al., 2001) and are consistent with the TRA, as they
portray behaviors under an individual’s volitional control (see
Appendix A for scenario descriptions).
204
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
Measures
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
Consistent with the proposed model, measures employed in
the questionnaire consisted of scales developed specifically
for constructs applicable to the act portrayed in each ethical scenario. Questionnaires included measures related to
attitude toward the act, subjective norm toward the act, behavioral norm toward the act, ethical judgment of the act, and
behavioral intention with respect to the act. In this study we
employed multiitem scales for all variables with the exception of intention.
Attitude measures. Attitude toward the act portrayed
in Scenario 1 consisted of four 7-point items, with respondents providing perceptions of the likelihood of possible outcomes and the corresponding importance of those outcomes
relating to the behavior in the scenario. The outcomes included that the action may result in legal problems for the
company, upset the management of the company, hurt the
reputation of the company, and hurt the actor’s reputation.
Attitude toward the act portrayed in Scenario 2 consisted of
three 7-point items and followed the format used for Scenario 1. The outcomes included that the action may upset
other employees at the company, upset the management at
the company, and hurt the reputation of the salesperson.
Subjective norm measures. The subjective norm toward the act portrayed in Scenario 1 consisted of three 7point items, with respondents providing perceptions of the
likelihood of important referents agreeing with the action and
respondents’ corresponding motivation to comply with each
referent’s view. Referents included employees in the company, friends, and family. The subjective norm toward the act
portrayed in Scenario 2 consisted of three 7-point items and
followed the format used for Scenario 1. Referents included
salespeople in the company, friends, and family.
Behavioral norm measures. The behavioral norm toward the act in Scenario 1 consisted of three 7-point items,
with respondents providing perceptions relating to most other
employees in the department, other departments, and other
companies undertaking the same action as the actor in the
scenario. The behavioral norm toward the act in Scenario 2
consisted of three 7-point items, with respondents providing
perceptions relating to most other salespeople in the company, other companies, and other industries undertaking the
same action as the actor in the scenario.
Ethical judgment measure. The ethical judgment of
the act consisted of three 7-point items, with respondents
providing perceptions relating to the justness, fairness, and
moral acceptability of the actor’s behavior (adapted from the
work of Cohen et al., 2001).
Intention measure. Behavioral intention with respect
to the act consisted of one 7-point item relating to the extent
a respondent would undertake the same action as the actor in
the scenario.
RESULTS
The objective of the present research was to test a model examining relationships among TRA, behavioral norm, and ethical judgment constructs for each scenario. Structural equation modeling was employed for model evaluation. As recommended, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to
assess the convergent and discriminant validity of the multiitem measures before testing hypotheses. With respect to
the measurement models, observed indicators were all statistically significant and evidenced large loadings on their
corresponding factors. Fit statistics of the measurement models suggested reasonable fit between observed indicators and
constructs, for Scenario 1, χ 2(94, N = 175) = 108.283, p =
.000, goodness of fit index (GFI) = .910, adjusted goodness
of fit index (AGFI) = .861, comparative fit index (CFI) =
.965, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) =
.069; for Scenario 2, χ 2(80, N = 173) = 93.274, p = .000,
GFI = .922, AGFI = .874, CFI = .968, RMSEA = .074.
Pairwise CFA was conducted to assess discriminant validity of the measures. For each pair of measures, across both
scenarios, trying to force the measures of different constructs
into a single underlying factor led to a significant deterioration of model fit in comparison to the two-factor model.
These results provide support for the discriminant validity of
the measures (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).
Based on measurement model results, composite scores
of the multiitem scales were used to address the research hypotheses. Specifically, all matched likelihood and importance
items were multiplied together, summed, and divided by the
number of paired items to form an overall attitude toward
the act. Similarly, all matched likelihood and motivation to
comply items were multiplied together, summed, and then
divided by the number of paired items to form an overall
subjective norm toward the act. Items related to behavioral
norms and ethical judgment were summed and averaged.
Tables 1 and 2 provide the means, standard deviations, correlations, and reliabilities for the multiitem measures used in
this study.
As noted previously, structural equation modeling was
employed for model evaluation. The results of estimating
the hypothesized model are presented in Tables 3 and 4.
Estimation of the model for each scenario resulted in a good
fit of the model to the data, for Scenario 1, χ 2(2, N = 175) =
2.589, p = .108, GFI = .994, AGFI = .912, CFI = .995,
RMSEA = .096; for Scenario 2, χ 2(2, N = 173) = 2.108, p =
.147, GFI = .995, AGFI = .927, CFI = .997, RMSEA = .080.
In addition, five of six hypothesized paths were statistically
significant in each model and in the predicted direction.
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
TABLE 1
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations and Reliabilities
for Model Constructs for Scenario 1
Mean
X1 Attitude
X2 Subjective norm
X3 Behavioral norm
X4 Ethical judgment
X5 Behavioral
intention
SD
28.75 12.21
17.04 8.04
3.94 1.14
4.48 1.42
3.78 1.61
X1
.90
−.41
−.40
.60
−.47
X2
.79
.49
−.57
.54
X3
X4
TABLE 3
Standardized Path Coefficients and t -Values for
Model Relationships and Model Fit Statistics for
Scenario 1
X5
Attitude to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to ethical judgment
Behavioral norm to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to behavioral intention
Behavioral norm to behavioral intention
Ethical judgment to behavioral intention
.91
.38
.81
.44 −.58
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
All correlations significant at p < .01
Consistent with expectations, attitude toward the act was
found to be significantly related to the ethical judgment of the
act for each scenario. As expected, the subjective norm toward the act was found to be significantly related to the ethical
judgment as well as intention for both scenarios. Behavioral
norm toward the act was found to be significant for one of
two expected paths, with a significant relationship found with
behavioral intention for Scenario 1 and a significant relationship found with ethical judgment for Scenario 2. Contrary to
expectations, behavioral norm was not significantly related
to ethical judgment for Scenario 1 and behavioral intention
for Scenario 2. Last, as anticipated, the ethical judgment was
found to be significantly related to behavioral intention for
each scenario.
DISCUSSION
The present study extends the understanding of ethical decision making by exploring relationships among traditional
TRA constructs and additional constructs. Specifically, we
examined a model that included an expansion of normative influence to include a behavioral norm and an ethical
judgment construct as proximal to intention. To our knowledge, these relationships have not been simultaneously explored in the business ethics literature. As noted previously,
the moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent
X1 Attitude
X2 Subjective norm
X3 Behavioral norm
X4 Ethical judgment
X5 Behavioral
intention
SD
X1
X2
X3
X4
24.53 11.89
.87
21.70 8.53 −.39
.73
4.88 1.05 −.16∗
.49
.92
3.64 1.73
.64 −.66 −.53
.91
4.21 1.73 −.52
.61
.50 −.77
All correlations significant at p < .01 unless otherwise noted
“∗ ” Significant at p < .05
Standardized
coefficient
t-value
.44
−.39
−.01
.24
.18
−.38
7.09
−5.95
−.13
3.13
2.71
−5.35
χ 2(2, N = 175) = 2.589. p = .108. GFI = .994. AGFI = .912. CFI =
.995. RMSEA = .096.
on the discrete actions of individuals. Thus, we addressed
the scholarly and managerial imperative of how individuals combine various cognitions in their ethical decision
making.
Summarizing significant findings that were observed for
both scenarios, attitude toward a questionable act, composed
of perceptions of negative consequences was significantly
related to the ethical judgment, that is, a negative judgment
of the act. Subjective norm toward the act was significantly
related to the ethical judgment such that perceptions that
important referents disagreed with the act were associated
with a negative judgment of the act and a weaker intention
to engage in the act. The ethical judgment of the act was
significantly related to the behavioral intention such that a
negative judgment of the act was related to a weaker intention
to engage in the act.
With respect to the addition of an ethical judgment construct to the TRA model, in the present study, ethical judgment was found to be a strong predictor of intention, which
is consistent with results reported by Cherry (2006). It would
appear that the inclusion of an ethical judgment construct in
models examining ethical intention would be worthwhile as
TABLE 4
Standardized Path Coefficient and t -Values for
Model Relationships and Model Fit Statistics for
Scenario 2
TABLE 2
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, and Reliabilities
for Model Constructs for Scenario 2
Mean
205
X5
Attitude to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to ethical judgment
Behavioral norm to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to behavioral intention
Behavioral norm to behavioral intention
Ethical judgment to behavioral intention
Standardized
coefficient
t-value
.46
−.33
−.29
.17
.10
−.60
9.72
−6.09
−5.68
2.56
1.73
−9.14
χ 2(2, N = 173) = 2.108. p = .147. GFI = .995. AGFI = .927. CFI =
.997. RMSEA = .080.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
206
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
a means of integrating an aspect of moral reasoning theory
(Kohlberg, 1969; Rest, 1983) with the TRA orientation.
Although the influence of the behavioral norm construct
was found to be significant in each model, results were mixed
in that it worked differently for the scenarios. For Scenario 1,
behavior norm toward the questionable act was significantly
related to the behavioral intention, such that perceptions that
relevant referents engage in the act were associated with a
stronger intention to engage in the act. For Scenario 2, behavioral norm toward the questionable act was significantly
related to the ethical judgment such that perceptions that
relevant referents engage in the act were related to a positive judgment of the act. Perhaps the fact that one scenario
(Scenario 2) includes an explicit reference to this type of normative influence whereas the other scenario does not might
account for these differences. Owing to the identification of
indirect and direct effects for the behavioral norm on intention, future TRA researchers should explore the extent of the
influence for different scenarios and samples of respondents.
As with any study employing cross-sectional, single time
period data collection, results should be interpreted with this
limitation in mind. A multidisciplinary student sample was
used, which is appropriate for inferences regarding students
and entry-level employees; however, experienced workers in
corporate settings may respond differently. Although the key
outcome variable used in this study and many others, behavioral intention, is appropriate for testing the TRA, future
researchers should include actual behavior. Of course, examining actual unethical behavior raises additional issues in the
conduct of the research.
Implications
From a practical standpoint, the TRA provides leverage
points from which to affect intention and behavior. Recall
that attitude toward the act was a strong predictor of ethical
judgment. Thus, persuasive communications aimed at the
potential negative consequences of unethical behavior could
prove useful in strengthening judgments of questionable actions. Note, however, that reliance on persuasive communication exclusively as is used in many classes and company
workshops, although addressing attitudes, addresses only one
component of the model that indirectly influences intention
through its impact on the ethical judgment.
Norms were also found to significantly exert indirect and
direct influence on intentions. Sharing important others perspectives appears to be relevant for encouraging ethical conduct. However, note that the influence of norms may affect
the ethical judgment or the intention. Sharing this insight
with students so that they are aware of the dual influence is
consistent with metacognitive approaches to improve thinking and learning. Further, note the distinction highlighted
in the present research between what significant others say
(subjective norm) and what they do (behavioral norm). Thus,
care must be taken that behavioral norms are not working
at cross-purposes with subjective norms, as in the case in
which peer employees are behaving unethically in the presence of pronouncements from top management regarding
proper conduct. This scenario argues for addressing the role
of ethics in organizational culture development and maintenance. For example, addressing alignment issues among
corporate policies and what leaders emphasize (i.e., what
is said) and role modeling and coaching used by supervisors
and criteria for allocating resources and rewards (i.e., aspects
of organizations that can influence what people do) as they
relate to ethical conduct would prove beneficial.
In conclusion, how individuals make (un)ethical decisions
continues to be a significant topic for business researchers
and practitioners. This research addresses some conceptual
issues in relationships among TRA-relevant constructs and,
in doing so, adds depth to the understanding of ethical intentions. It is hoped that the present theory-driven approach
contributes to future empirical efforts aimed at developing
a more nuanced understanding of how individuals combine
various cognitions related to ethical decision making.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In
J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.),Action control: From cognition to behavior
(pp. 11–39). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago, IL: Dorsey
Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting
social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Anderson, J. C. (1997). What cognitive science tells us about ethics and the
teaching of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 279–291.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in
practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological
Bulletin, 103, 411–423.
Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer
Research, 15, 473–481.
Buchan, H. F. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public accounting
profession: An extension of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Journal
of Business Ethics, 61, 165–181.
Cannon, J. P., Achrol, R. S., & Gundlach, G. T. (2000). Contracts, norms, and
plural form governance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
28, 180–194.
Carpenter, T. C., & Reimers, J. L. (2005). Unethical and fraudulent financial
reporting: Applying the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business
Ethics, 60, 115–129.
Chan, S. Y., & Leung, P. (2006). The effects of accounting students’ ethical
reasoning and personal factors on their ethical sensitivity. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 21, 436–457.
Chassin, L., Presson, C. C., Sherman, S. J., Corty, E., & Olsavsky, R. (1984).
Predicting the onset of cigarette smoking in adolescents: A longitudinal
study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 224–243.
Cherry, J. (2006). The impact of normative influence and locus of control on
ethical judgments and intentions: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal
of Business Ethics, 68, 113–132.
Chonko, L. B., & Hunt, S. D. (1985). Ethics and marketing management:
An empirical Examination. Journal of Business Research, 13, 339–359.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1995). An international comparison
of moral constructs underlying auditors’ ethical judgments. Research on
Accounting Ethics, 1, 97–126.
Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W. & Sharp, D. J. (2001). An examination of
differences in ethical decision-making between Canadian business students and accounting professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 319–
335.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned
behavior: A review and Avenues for further research. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 28, 1429–1464.
Dubinsky, A. J., & Loken, B. (1989). Analyzing ethical decision making in
marketing. Journal of Business Research, 19, 83–107.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth,
TX: Harcourt Brace.
Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Marketing,
49, 87–96.
Fishbein, M. (1993). Introduction. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish
(Eds.), The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS-preventive
behavior (pp. XV–XXV). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
Gibson, A. M., & Frakes, A. H. (1997). Truth of consequences: A study
of critical issues and decision making in accounting. Journal of Business
Ethics, 16, 161–171.
Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of
its applications to health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health
Promotion, 11, 87–98.
Haytko, D. L. (2004). Firm-to-firm and interpersonal relationships: Perspectives from advertising agency account managers. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 32, 313–327.
Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). General theory of marketing ethic. Journal
of Macromarketing. Spring, 5–16.
Kandel, D. B. (1980). Drug and drinking behavior among youth. Annual
Review of Sociology, 6, 235–285.
Kashima, Y., & Gallois, C. (1993). The theory of reasoned action and
problem-focused Research. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish
(Eds.), The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS-preventive
behavior (pp. 207–226). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stages and sequences: The cognitive development approach to Socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization
theory and research (pp. 346–480). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Legace, R. R., Dahlstrom, R., & Gassenheimer, J. (1991). The relevance of
ethical salesperson behavior on relationship quality: The pharmaceutical
industry. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 11(4),
39–47.
207
McAllister, A. L., Krosnick, J. A., & Milburn, M. A. (1984). Causes of
adolescent cigarette smoking: Tests of a structural equation model. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 47, 24–36.
Nucifora, J., Gallois, C., & Kashima, Y. (1993). Influences on condom
use among undergraduates: Testing the theories of reasoned action and
planned behavior. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish (Eds.), The
theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS- preventive behavior
(pp. 41–64). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Rest, J. R. (1983). Morality. In J. Flavell & E. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of
child psychology (Vol. III, 4th ed., pp. 556–628). New York, NY: Wiley.
Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory.
New York, NY: Praeger.
Sheppard, B., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. (1988). The theory of reasoned
action: A meta analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325–343.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A personsituation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, July,
601–617.
APPENDIX A
ETHICAL SCENARIOS
Scenario 1
The owner of a small business, which is currently in financial
difficulty, approaches a longtime friend to borrow and copy
a copyrighted database software package which will be of
great help in generating future business. The longtime friend
is a manager of an IT department and can borrow the software
from his or her own company. The friend loans the software
package.
Scenario 2
A salesperson, the parent of two children, has been promoted to a job in which frequent travel away from home
is required by the company. Because the trips are frequent
and inconvenience the salesperson’s family, the salesperson
is considering charging some small personal expenses while
traveling for the company. The salesperson has heard that
this is a common practice among other salespersons.
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action in
Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative
Influence and Ethical Judgment
Kevin Celuch & Andy Dill
To cite this article: Kevin Celuch & Andy Dill (2011) An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned
Action in Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative Influence and Ethical Judgment,
Journal of Education for Business, 86:4, 201-207, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
Published online: 21 Apr 2011.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 319
View related articles
Citing articles: 1 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]
Date: 11 January 2016, At: 22:16
JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 86: 201–207, 2011
C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Copyright
ISSN: 0883-2323
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2010.502913
An Extension of the Theory of Reasoned Action in
Ethical Decision Contexts: The Role of Normative
Influence and Ethical Judgment
Kevin Celuch and Andy Dill
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
University of Southern Indiana, Evansville, Indiana, USA
The moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent on the discrete actions of individuals. The authors address the scholarly and managerial imperative of how individuals
combine various cognitions in their ethical decision making. The study extends the understanding of ethical decision making by exploring relationships among Theory of Reasoned
Action–relevant constructs. Specifically, the authors examined a model that included an expansion of normative influence to include a behavioral norm and an ethical judgment construct
as proximal to intention. To their knowledge, these relationships had not been simultaneously explored in the business ethics literature. Responses from a multidisciplinary student
sample to 2 ethical scenarios were examined with structural equation modeling and largely
support-hypothesized relationships. Results hold implications for future theory, research, and
management of individual-level ethical decision making.
Keywords: ethical decisions, ethical judgment, theory of reasoned action
Over the past four decades, ethical behavior in business
has been the focus of researchers across multiple disciplines. While various players have been implicated in ethical transgressions over this time, the real story relates to
the damage to individuals, organizations, industries, and perhaps economies, particularly in light of the recent subprime
mortgage fiasco. In response to unethical conduct, regulatory and policy initiatives at the level of organizations and
industries have been promulgated and implemented and more
are sure to follow, yet, as recognized by Lagace, Dahlstrom,
and Gassenheimer (1991), the moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent on the discrete actions of individuals. Indeed, Haytko (2004), in exploring organizational
relationships, observed that it is difficult for employees to
think in terms of relationships between firms without thinking of relationships between individuals. In order to effectively prepare individuals to assume roles as responsible
business professionals, it is important for business educators and corporate trainers to understand the nature of ethical
decisions so that enhanced curriculum and training can be
Correspondence should be addressed to Kevin Celuch, University
of Southern Indiana, College of Business, 8600 University Boulevard,
Evansville, IN 47712, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
developed to improve ethical decision making. Thus, understanding individual-level ethical conduct in business contexts
is a continuing imperative.
Two important themes embedded in literature aimed at
understanding individual-level ethical decision making and
behavior relate to (a) the need for theory-driven, programmatic research (cf. Gibson & Frakes, 1997; Hunt & Vitell,
1986); and (b) the need for developing an understanding that
moves beyond mere knowledge of rules or facts to a more
nuanced perspective of how individuals weigh and combine
various elements of experience related to ethical reasoning
(cf. Anderson, 1997; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989).
One approach that has received attention in the business
ethics literature is grounded in social psychological perspectives that explain intention and behavior (Ajzen, 1985,
1991; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). A clear strength of this approach is that it combines well-grounded theory that explains
how individual-level cognitions combine to determine intention and behavior with the potential for practical, problemrelevant interventions based on the theory. Insights gained
from the use of these models attests to their potential for increasing our understanding of ethical intention and behavior
in business contexts (Buchan, 2005; Carpenter & Reimers,
2005; Cherry, 2006; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989; Gibson &
Frakes, 1997).
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
202
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
The present study extends this line of research in three
ways. We echo the admonition related to the need for theorybased, programmatic research. To this end, we explored a
variant of the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) that proposes two theoretical extensions to applications of the model
in the ethical domain. Literature in the area raises theoretical
issues with respect to variables that might further researchers’
understanding of the determinants of behavioral intentions
and ultimately behavior. One issue relates to the expansion
of normative influence to include a behavioral norm in addition to a subjective norm; a second issue relates to the
addition of an ethical judgment construct to the TRA model.
In the next section of the article, we briefly review the
theoretical model that is the foundation of this research. We
describe the specific model to be tested along with justification for proposed constructs and relationships. Then, we
provide an overview of the methodology of the study and then
present the findings. In final section we discuss results and
address theoretical, research, and managerial implications.
Theory of Reasoned Action
The TRA (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975)
places intention as the immediate antecedent of behavior,
and thus the stronger the intention the more likely the occurrence of the corresponding behavior. Determining intention
are attitude and subjective norm. The attitude component is
composed of beliefs, the perceived likelihood of particular
consequences of the behavior, weighted by an evaluation
of the consequences. The subjective norm component is conceptualized as normative beliefs, the perceived pressure from
salient referents, weighted by the motivation to comply with
the referents. The TRA has received support across a range of
contexts (cf. Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Sheppard, Hartwick,
& Warshaw, 1988). The TRA was developed to deal with
behaviors that are under an individual’s volitional control
(Ajzen, 1988; Fishbein, 1993).
Ajzen (1988, 1991) proposed an extension to the TRA—a
perceived behavioral control construct. Perceived behavioral
control relates to the ease or difficulty of performing a behavior in which an individual’s volitional control may be called
into question. Additionally, calls have been renewed for the
exploration of additional constructs that might expand these
models (Conner & Armitage, 1998).
A Conceptual Extension of the Theory of
Planned Behavior for Ethical Decision Making
Figure 1 depicts a model adapted from the TRA that integrates constructs from related attitudinal and ethical decision
making literature. In the model, intention to engage in an
ethically questionable action is determined by the attitude
toward the act, the subjective norm toward the act, the behavioral norm toward the act, and an ethical judgment with
respect to the act. The attitude, subjective norm, and behavioral norm components are viewed as immediate antecedents
Attitude
Subjective
Norm
Ethical
Judgment
Behavioral
Intention
Behavioral
Norm
FIGURE 1 A conceptual extension of the theory of reasoned action for
ethical decision making.
of the ethical judgment. The ethical judgment and the subjective and behavioral norms are also posited to directly affect
behavioral intention. Justification for specific hypotheses developed from relevant literature follows.
Attitude, subjective norm, and intention related to the act
are the foundation of the TRA. These constructs have been
featured prominently in prior research in the ethical decisionmaking domain and are thus included in the present research
as relevant antecedents (attitude and subjective norm) and
outcome (intention) variables (cf. Buchan, 2005; Carpenter
& Reimers, 2005; Cherry, 2006; Dubinsky & Loken, 1989;
Gibson & Frakes, 1997).
Although most of the research utilizing intention models
has included a subjective norm (i.e., an individual’s view
about what significant others think the individual should do
in a given context), discussion has been raised regarding
the concept of a behavioral norm (i.e., an individual’s belief
about what others are doing in a given context) as an independent predictor in attitude models (Kashima & Gallois, 1993).
Care in selecting the appropriate normative constructs is in
keeping with Eagly and Chaiken’s (1993) caution against
insufficient consideration of the social context of attitudes
and intentions as well as with reviews related to intention
models highlighting the need for consideration of normative
influences beyond subjective norms (Godin & Kok, 1996;
Sheppard et al., 1988).
Indeed, research related to ethical decision making points
to the potential significance of behavioral norms. For example, Ferrell and Gresham (1985) explicitly included the
influence from associating or interacting with others who are
acting unethically in their model of ethical decision making. Gibson and Frakes (1997), in exploring unethical decision making by CPAs, included a question as to what other
CPAs would do in the situation. Of those reporting questionable conduct, significant percentages also reported they
believed others would perform the unethical act. In testing an
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
intention model, Buchan (2005) included an ethical climate
construct that could include the notion of how others within
the organization are behaving in situations involving ethical
content. This perspective is also consistent with the thinking of Trevino (1986), who suggested that job context and
culture were aspects influencing ethical decision making in
organizations. Given the previous discussion, we believe the
behavioral norm concept may be particularly relevant to understanding ethical decision making, as individuals are likely
to look to the behavior of relevant others in their environment
for input regarding appropriate conduct.
Prior efforts to extend the intention models in ethical decision contexts have included ethical sensitivity and ethical
judgment components of Rest’s (1983) model. The thinking underlying such efforts relates to an attempt to integrate aspects of moral reasoning theory (Kohlberg, 1969;
Rest, 1983) within intention models. Of relevance to the
present research are findings that did not support relationships between ethical sensitivity and intentions or ethical
reasoning (Buchan, 2005; Chan & Leung, 2006). In contrast,
Cherry (2006) found a strong relationship between ethical
judgment and intention. Justification for the addition of an
ethical judgment construct as a proximal antecedent to intention in the present research is based on its central role in
a number of ethical frameworks (cf. Hunt & Vitell, 1986;
Rest, 1983, 1986). Specifically, Hunt and Vitell as well as
Cherry placed ethical judgment as an immediate antecedent
to intention. Hunt and Vitell’s model conceives of consequences and their evaluation and important stakeholders as
antecedents to ethical judgments. Similarly, Cherry proposed
and found support for attitudinal and normative influence on
ethical judgment. Literature related to normative influence
in consumer and business contexts has linked its effects to
judgment processes (i.e., risk reduction) in decision making (cf. Bearden, Netemeyer, & Teel, 1989; Cannon, Achrol,
& Gundlach, 2000). Therefore, we proposed the following
hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1 (H 1 ): Attitude toward the act would be significantly related to the ethical judgment of the act.
Specifically, strong (weak) perceptions of negative consequences associated with the act would be associated
with the judgment of the act as unethical (ethical).
H 2 : Subjective norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the ethical judgment. That is, perceptions that
important referents disagree (agree) with the questionable action would be associated with the judgment of
the act as unethical (ethical).
H 3 : Behavioral norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the ethical judgment. That is, perceptions that
relevant referents do (not) engage in the questionable
act would be associated with the judgment of the act as
ethical (unethical).
Subjective and behavioral norms should have direct influence on intention. Cherry (2006) found support for the in-
203
fluence of subjective norms on ethical intention. Behavioral
norms have also been found to be independent predictors of
intention and behavior (cf. Kashima & Gallois, 1993; Nucifora, Gallois, & Kashima, 1993). In addition, the impact
of normative influence on the adoption of harmful behavior
is well established (cf. Chassin, Presson, Sherman, Corty,
& Olsavsky, 1984; Kandel, 1980; McAllister, Krosnick, &
Milburn, 1984). Taken together, results point to the direct
influence of norms on ethical intention. Therefore, we proposed the following hypotheses:
H 4 : Subjective norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention with respect to the
ethical act. That is, perceptions that important referents agree (disagree) with the questionable action would
be associated with the intention to (not) engage in the
act.
H 5 : Behavioral norm toward the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention. That is, perceptions
that relevant referents do (not) engage in the questionable
act would be associated with the intention to (not) engage
in the act.
Last, Hunt and Vitell (1986) and Cherry (2006) conceived
of ethical judgment as an immediate antecedent to intention.
Cherry found a strong relationship between ethical judgment
and intention. Therefore, we posited the following hypothesis:
H 6 : The ethical judgment of the act would be significantly
related to the behavioral intention. Specifically, the judgment of the act as ethical (unethical) would be associated
with the intention to (not) engage in the act.
METHOD
Sample and Procedure
Participants were 348 students enrolled in introductory accounting classes at a medium-sized Midwestern university.
Given that the course is a requirement in the business core,
the resultant sample was multidisciplinary in composition.
Individuals in each class were randomly assigned one of two
ethical scenarios along with a measurement questionnaire.
Students were instructed to read the vignette and then to
answer the questionnaire.
Ethical scenarios are used extensively in business ethics
research (cf. Buchan, 2005; Chonko & Hunt, 1985; Cohen,
Pant, & Sharp, 1995, 2001). As a category of stimulus materials, scenarios combine the benefits of standardization and
mundane realism (Cherry, 2006). The specific scenarios used
in the present study were used in prior ethical research (Cohen et al., 2001) and are consistent with the TRA, as they
portray behaviors under an individual’s volitional control (see
Appendix A for scenario descriptions).
204
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
Measures
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
Consistent with the proposed model, measures employed in
the questionnaire consisted of scales developed specifically
for constructs applicable to the act portrayed in each ethical scenario. Questionnaires included measures related to
attitude toward the act, subjective norm toward the act, behavioral norm toward the act, ethical judgment of the act, and
behavioral intention with respect to the act. In this study we
employed multiitem scales for all variables with the exception of intention.
Attitude measures. Attitude toward the act portrayed
in Scenario 1 consisted of four 7-point items, with respondents providing perceptions of the likelihood of possible outcomes and the corresponding importance of those outcomes
relating to the behavior in the scenario. The outcomes included that the action may result in legal problems for the
company, upset the management of the company, hurt the
reputation of the company, and hurt the actor’s reputation.
Attitude toward the act portrayed in Scenario 2 consisted of
three 7-point items and followed the format used for Scenario 1. The outcomes included that the action may upset
other employees at the company, upset the management at
the company, and hurt the reputation of the salesperson.
Subjective norm measures. The subjective norm toward the act portrayed in Scenario 1 consisted of three 7point items, with respondents providing perceptions of the
likelihood of important referents agreeing with the action and
respondents’ corresponding motivation to comply with each
referent’s view. Referents included employees in the company, friends, and family. The subjective norm toward the act
portrayed in Scenario 2 consisted of three 7-point items and
followed the format used for Scenario 1. Referents included
salespeople in the company, friends, and family.
Behavioral norm measures. The behavioral norm toward the act in Scenario 1 consisted of three 7-point items,
with respondents providing perceptions relating to most other
employees in the department, other departments, and other
companies undertaking the same action as the actor in the
scenario. The behavioral norm toward the act in Scenario 2
consisted of three 7-point items, with respondents providing
perceptions relating to most other salespeople in the company, other companies, and other industries undertaking the
same action as the actor in the scenario.
Ethical judgment measure. The ethical judgment of
the act consisted of three 7-point items, with respondents
providing perceptions relating to the justness, fairness, and
moral acceptability of the actor’s behavior (adapted from the
work of Cohen et al., 2001).
Intention measure. Behavioral intention with respect
to the act consisted of one 7-point item relating to the extent
a respondent would undertake the same action as the actor in
the scenario.
RESULTS
The objective of the present research was to test a model examining relationships among TRA, behavioral norm, and ethical judgment constructs for each scenario. Structural equation modeling was employed for model evaluation. As recommended, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to
assess the convergent and discriminant validity of the multiitem measures before testing hypotheses. With respect to
the measurement models, observed indicators were all statistically significant and evidenced large loadings on their
corresponding factors. Fit statistics of the measurement models suggested reasonable fit between observed indicators and
constructs, for Scenario 1, χ 2(94, N = 175) = 108.283, p =
.000, goodness of fit index (GFI) = .910, adjusted goodness
of fit index (AGFI) = .861, comparative fit index (CFI) =
.965, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) =
.069; for Scenario 2, χ 2(80, N = 173) = 93.274, p = .000,
GFI = .922, AGFI = .874, CFI = .968, RMSEA = .074.
Pairwise CFA was conducted to assess discriminant validity of the measures. For each pair of measures, across both
scenarios, trying to force the measures of different constructs
into a single underlying factor led to a significant deterioration of model fit in comparison to the two-factor model.
These results provide support for the discriminant validity of
the measures (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).
Based on measurement model results, composite scores
of the multiitem scales were used to address the research hypotheses. Specifically, all matched likelihood and importance
items were multiplied together, summed, and divided by the
number of paired items to form an overall attitude toward
the act. Similarly, all matched likelihood and motivation to
comply items were multiplied together, summed, and then
divided by the number of paired items to form an overall
subjective norm toward the act. Items related to behavioral
norms and ethical judgment were summed and averaged.
Tables 1 and 2 provide the means, standard deviations, correlations, and reliabilities for the multiitem measures used in
this study.
As noted previously, structural equation modeling was
employed for model evaluation. The results of estimating
the hypothesized model are presented in Tables 3 and 4.
Estimation of the model for each scenario resulted in a good
fit of the model to the data, for Scenario 1, χ 2(2, N = 175) =
2.589, p = .108, GFI = .994, AGFI = .912, CFI = .995,
RMSEA = .096; for Scenario 2, χ 2(2, N = 173) = 2.108, p =
.147, GFI = .995, AGFI = .927, CFI = .997, RMSEA = .080.
In addition, five of six hypothesized paths were statistically
significant in each model and in the predicted direction.
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
TABLE 1
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations and Reliabilities
for Model Constructs for Scenario 1
Mean
X1 Attitude
X2 Subjective norm
X3 Behavioral norm
X4 Ethical judgment
X5 Behavioral
intention
SD
28.75 12.21
17.04 8.04
3.94 1.14
4.48 1.42
3.78 1.61
X1
.90
−.41
−.40
.60
−.47
X2
.79
.49
−.57
.54
X3
X4
TABLE 3
Standardized Path Coefficients and t -Values for
Model Relationships and Model Fit Statistics for
Scenario 1
X5
Attitude to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to ethical judgment
Behavioral norm to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to behavioral intention
Behavioral norm to behavioral intention
Ethical judgment to behavioral intention
.91
.38
.81
.44 −.58
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
All correlations significant at p < .01
Consistent with expectations, attitude toward the act was
found to be significantly related to the ethical judgment of the
act for each scenario. As expected, the subjective norm toward the act was found to be significantly related to the ethical
judgment as well as intention for both scenarios. Behavioral
norm toward the act was found to be significant for one of
two expected paths, with a significant relationship found with
behavioral intention for Scenario 1 and a significant relationship found with ethical judgment for Scenario 2. Contrary to
expectations, behavioral norm was not significantly related
to ethical judgment for Scenario 1 and behavioral intention
for Scenario 2. Last, as anticipated, the ethical judgment was
found to be significantly related to behavioral intention for
each scenario.
DISCUSSION
The present study extends the understanding of ethical decision making by exploring relationships among traditional
TRA constructs and additional constructs. Specifically, we
examined a model that included an expansion of normative influence to include a behavioral norm and an ethical
judgment construct as proximal to intention. To our knowledge, these relationships have not been simultaneously explored in the business ethics literature. As noted previously,
the moral conduct of organizations is ultimately dependent
X1 Attitude
X2 Subjective norm
X3 Behavioral norm
X4 Ethical judgment
X5 Behavioral
intention
SD
X1
X2
X3
X4
24.53 11.89
.87
21.70 8.53 −.39
.73
4.88 1.05 −.16∗
.49
.92
3.64 1.73
.64 −.66 −.53
.91
4.21 1.73 −.52
.61
.50 −.77
All correlations significant at p < .01 unless otherwise noted
“∗ ” Significant at p < .05
Standardized
coefficient
t-value
.44
−.39
−.01
.24
.18
−.38
7.09
−5.95
−.13
3.13
2.71
−5.35
χ 2(2, N = 175) = 2.589. p = .108. GFI = .994. AGFI = .912. CFI =
.995. RMSEA = .096.
on the discrete actions of individuals. Thus, we addressed
the scholarly and managerial imperative of how individuals combine various cognitions in their ethical decision
making.
Summarizing significant findings that were observed for
both scenarios, attitude toward a questionable act, composed
of perceptions of negative consequences was significantly
related to the ethical judgment, that is, a negative judgment
of the act. Subjective norm toward the act was significantly
related to the ethical judgment such that perceptions that
important referents disagreed with the act were associated
with a negative judgment of the act and a weaker intention
to engage in the act. The ethical judgment of the act was
significantly related to the behavioral intention such that a
negative judgment of the act was related to a weaker intention
to engage in the act.
With respect to the addition of an ethical judgment construct to the TRA model, in the present study, ethical judgment was found to be a strong predictor of intention, which
is consistent with results reported by Cherry (2006). It would
appear that the inclusion of an ethical judgment construct in
models examining ethical intention would be worthwhile as
TABLE 4
Standardized Path Coefficient and t -Values for
Model Relationships and Model Fit Statistics for
Scenario 2
TABLE 2
Descriptive Statistics, Correlations, and Reliabilities
for Model Constructs for Scenario 2
Mean
205
X5
Attitude to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to ethical judgment
Behavioral norm to ethical judgment
Subjective norm to behavioral intention
Behavioral norm to behavioral intention
Ethical judgment to behavioral intention
Standardized
coefficient
t-value
.46
−.33
−.29
.17
.10
−.60
9.72
−6.09
−5.68
2.56
1.73
−9.14
χ 2(2, N = 173) = 2.108. p = .147. GFI = .995. AGFI = .927. CFI =
.997. RMSEA = .080.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
206
K. CELUCH AND A. DILL
a means of integrating an aspect of moral reasoning theory
(Kohlberg, 1969; Rest, 1983) with the TRA orientation.
Although the influence of the behavioral norm construct
was found to be significant in each model, results were mixed
in that it worked differently for the scenarios. For Scenario 1,
behavior norm toward the questionable act was significantly
related to the behavioral intention, such that perceptions that
relevant referents engage in the act were associated with a
stronger intention to engage in the act. For Scenario 2, behavioral norm toward the questionable act was significantly
related to the ethical judgment such that perceptions that
relevant referents engage in the act were related to a positive judgment of the act. Perhaps the fact that one scenario
(Scenario 2) includes an explicit reference to this type of normative influence whereas the other scenario does not might
account for these differences. Owing to the identification of
indirect and direct effects for the behavioral norm on intention, future TRA researchers should explore the extent of the
influence for different scenarios and samples of respondents.
As with any study employing cross-sectional, single time
period data collection, results should be interpreted with this
limitation in mind. A multidisciplinary student sample was
used, which is appropriate for inferences regarding students
and entry-level employees; however, experienced workers in
corporate settings may respond differently. Although the key
outcome variable used in this study and many others, behavioral intention, is appropriate for testing the TRA, future
researchers should include actual behavior. Of course, examining actual unethical behavior raises additional issues in the
conduct of the research.
Implications
From a practical standpoint, the TRA provides leverage
points from which to affect intention and behavior. Recall
that attitude toward the act was a strong predictor of ethical
judgment. Thus, persuasive communications aimed at the
potential negative consequences of unethical behavior could
prove useful in strengthening judgments of questionable actions. Note, however, that reliance on persuasive communication exclusively as is used in many classes and company
workshops, although addressing attitudes, addresses only one
component of the model that indirectly influences intention
through its impact on the ethical judgment.
Norms were also found to significantly exert indirect and
direct influence on intentions. Sharing important others perspectives appears to be relevant for encouraging ethical conduct. However, note that the influence of norms may affect
the ethical judgment or the intention. Sharing this insight
with students so that they are aware of the dual influence is
consistent with metacognitive approaches to improve thinking and learning. Further, note the distinction highlighted
in the present research between what significant others say
(subjective norm) and what they do (behavioral norm). Thus,
care must be taken that behavioral norms are not working
at cross-purposes with subjective norms, as in the case in
which peer employees are behaving unethically in the presence of pronouncements from top management regarding
proper conduct. This scenario argues for addressing the role
of ethics in organizational culture development and maintenance. For example, addressing alignment issues among
corporate policies and what leaders emphasize (i.e., what
is said) and role modeling and coaching used by supervisors
and criteria for allocating resources and rewards (i.e., aspects
of organizations that can influence what people do) as they
relate to ethical conduct would prove beneficial.
In conclusion, how individuals make (un)ethical decisions
continues to be a significant topic for business researchers
and practitioners. This research addresses some conceptual
issues in relationships among TRA-relevant constructs and,
in doing so, adds depth to the understanding of ethical intentions. It is hoped that the present theory-driven approach
contributes to future empirical efforts aimed at developing
a more nuanced understanding of how individuals combine
various cognitions related to ethical decision making.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In
J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.),Action control: From cognition to behavior
(pp. 11–39). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago, IL: Dorsey
Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting
social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Anderson, J. C. (1997). What cognitive science tells us about ethics and the
teaching of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 279–291.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in
practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological
Bulletin, 103, 411–423.
Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of
consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. Journal of Consumer
Research, 15, 473–481.
Buchan, H. F. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public accounting
profession: An extension of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Journal
of Business Ethics, 61, 165–181.
Cannon, J. P., Achrol, R. S., & Gundlach, G. T. (2000). Contracts, norms, and
plural form governance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
28, 180–194.
Carpenter, T. C., & Reimers, J. L. (2005). Unethical and fraudulent financial
reporting: Applying the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business
Ethics, 60, 115–129.
Chan, S. Y., & Leung, P. (2006). The effects of accounting students’ ethical
reasoning and personal factors on their ethical sensitivity. Managerial
Auditing Journal, 21, 436–457.
Chassin, L., Presson, C. C., Sherman, S. J., Corty, E., & Olsavsky, R. (1984).
Predicting the onset of cigarette smoking in adolescents: A longitudinal
study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 224–243.
Cherry, J. (2006). The impact of normative influence and locus of control on
ethical judgments and intentions: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal
of Business Ethics, 68, 113–132.
Chonko, L. B., & Hunt, S. D. (1985). Ethics and marketing management:
An empirical Examination. Journal of Business Research, 13, 339–359.
Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 22:16 11 January 2016
THEORY OF REASONED ACTION
Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (1995). An international comparison
of moral constructs underlying auditors’ ethical judgments. Research on
Accounting Ethics, 1, 97–126.
Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W. & Sharp, D. J. (2001). An examination of
differences in ethical decision-making between Canadian business students and accounting professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 319–
335.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned
behavior: A review and Avenues for further research. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 28, 1429–1464.
Dubinsky, A. J., & Loken, B. (1989). Analyzing ethical decision making in
marketing. Journal of Business Research, 19, 83–107.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth,
TX: Harcourt Brace.
Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Marketing,
49, 87–96.
Fishbein, M. (1993). Introduction. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish
(Eds.), The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS-preventive
behavior (pp. XV–XXV). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
Gibson, A. M., & Frakes, A. H. (1997). Truth of consequences: A study
of critical issues and decision making in accounting. Journal of Business
Ethics, 16, 161–171.
Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of
its applications to health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health
Promotion, 11, 87–98.
Haytko, D. L. (2004). Firm-to-firm and interpersonal relationships: Perspectives from advertising agency account managers. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 32, 313–327.
Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). General theory of marketing ethic. Journal
of Macromarketing. Spring, 5–16.
Kandel, D. B. (1980). Drug and drinking behavior among youth. Annual
Review of Sociology, 6, 235–285.
Kashima, Y., & Gallois, C. (1993). The theory of reasoned action and
problem-focused Research. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish
(Eds.), The theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS-preventive
behavior (pp. 207–226). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stages and sequences: The cognitive development approach to Socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization
theory and research (pp. 346–480). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Legace, R. R., Dahlstrom, R., & Gassenheimer, J. (1991). The relevance of
ethical salesperson behavior on relationship quality: The pharmaceutical
industry. The Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 11(4),
39–47.
207
McAllister, A. L., Krosnick, J. A., & Milburn, M. A. (1984). Causes of
adolescent cigarette smoking: Tests of a structural equation model. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 47, 24–36.
Nucifora, J., Gallois, C., & Kashima, Y. (1993). Influences on condom
use among undergraduates: Testing the theories of reasoned action and
planned behavior. In D. J. Terry, C. Gallois, & M. McCamish (Eds.), The
theory of reasoned action: Its application to AIDS- preventive behavior
(pp. 41–64). Oxford, England: Pergamon.
Rest, J. R. (1983). Morality. In J. Flavell & E. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of
child psychology (Vol. III, 4th ed., pp. 556–628). New York, NY: Wiley.
Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory.
New York, NY: Praeger.
Sheppard, B., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. (1988). The theory of reasoned
action: A meta analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325–343.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A personsituation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, July,
601–617.
APPENDIX A
ETHICAL SCENARIOS
Scenario 1
The owner of a small business, which is currently in financial
difficulty, approaches a longtime friend to borrow and copy
a copyrighted database software package which will be of
great help in generating future business. The longtime friend
is a manager of an IT department and can borrow the software
from his or her own company. The friend loans the software
package.
Scenario 2
A salesperson, the parent of two children, has been promoted to a job in which frequent travel away from home
is required by the company. Because the trips are frequent
and inconvenience the salesperson’s family, the salesperson
is considering charging some small personal expenses while
traveling for the company. The salesperson has heard that
this is a common practice among other salespersons.