Ethical ideology and information manipulation: are the relativists really the bad apples?

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to examine the influence of ethical ideology (EID) toward the commission of information or measures manipulation (IMM), as it is a less salient ethical issue that has failed to attract the attention of researchers.

Design/methodology/approach

Using stratified random sampling strategy, this study used survey questionnaire with 217 usable responses. It adopted a relatively new Ruler-Option (RO) scale. Both SPSS 21 and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) were used to analyze its data.

Findings

Findings revealed surprising results where idealism and IMM was significantly positively related, while relativism and IMM was significantly negatively related, contradicting the generalized theory that relativists demonstrate higher propensity to behave unethically as compared to idealists.

Research limitations/implications

This study only examined a direct relationship between EID and IMM when such relationship might be influenced by other mediating or moderating effects. It also exclusively focused on a single industry, hence limiting a meaningful comparison among multiple industries.

Practical implications

The finding provides a proof that IMM does prevail in a highly regulated banking industry that efforts must be made to curb these practices. Notably, having relativists as decision-makers may give an advantage due to their ability to comprehensively appraise every ethical issue based on the situational context.

Originality/value

Due to its contradictory findings, this study contributed essential insights to the existing body of knowledge by stimulating discussion on EID and unethical behavior. Additionally, it provides evidence for the suitability of RO scale and the PLS-SEM in statistical analysis.

Citation

Adnan, N.L., Che Ku Kassim, C.K.H. and Ali, R. (2019), "Ethical ideology and information manipulation: are the relativists really the bad apples?", International Journal of Ethics and Systems, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 513-530. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-04-2019-0072