Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
Dance With Morality: Is Individual Materialism The Root of
Moral Transgression Intentions?
Hao-Wen Gu1, Meng-Hui Hsu2 and Hsiu-Hua Hu3
Drawing on literature in materialism and morality, the present study explored the impacts of
individual materialism (i.e., acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and
possession-defined success) on his/her moral transgression intentions. Additionally, this
study also examined the moderating role of individual moral competence as a buffer on this
positive relationship. The study used a 2×2×2 scenario experiment design to investigate those
impacts. Total valid samples were received from 364 students of M.B.A. degree program in
the northern schools of management in Taiwan. The results showed that acquisition centrality
and possession-defined success of individual materialism had the main effects on moral
transgression intentions, respectively. In addition, individuals with higher moral competence
can weaken the relationships between individual materialism and moral transgression
intentions. Finally, the limitations of this study are discussed and suggestions for further
research are proposed.
Keywords: Individual Materialism,
Transgression Intentions.
Individual Moral Competence
and
Moral
1. Introduction
In more recent years, a series of political and corporate scandals occurred in Taiwan,
including corruption, embezzlement, inside trading, divulge of secrets, frauds, food safety,
etc. In political side, the most concern in recently was that the former Executive Yuan
secretary’s corruption scandal, this not only ruined the promising future of personal, but also
made the Taiwan’s government into disrepute. On the corporate side, corruption and fraud
are two most common unethical behaviors in the media reports. Especially, food industry
repeatedly caught in the scandal storm of these unscrupulous operators on deception
behaviors, resulting in food safety problems taken seriously.
Since the frequent scandals occurred, many people start to think what’s wrong with
that? Exploring these immoral behaviors, we considered that ethical beliefs may play a
central role in one’s overall psychological makeup and then affect behaviors in a variety of
situations, and they refer to desired end states (Pitts & Woodside, 1991; Rokeach, 1973).
The last decades have seen growing importance place on research in individual
materialism. The majority of research in individual materialism has focused on a variety of
consumer behaviors with potentially negative outcomes, including compulsive buying
(Rindfleisch, Burroughs & Denton, 1997; Roberts, Manolis & Tanner, 2003), social
consumption motivation (Fitzmaurice & Comegys, 2006), self-doubt and insecurity (Chang
& Arkin, 2002), social anxiety (Schroeder & Dugal, 1995; Kashdan & Breen, 2007), selfesteem contingent on praise (Deci & Ryan, 1995; Chaplin & John, 2007), and money
1
Department of International Business, Ming Chuan University, Taiwan, Address: (111) 250 Zhong Shan N.
Rd., Sec. 5, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. E-mail: ggdw333@gmail.com, Tel: +886-2-28824564
2
Department of Managerial Economics, University of California, Davis, U.S.A., Address: 644 Alvarado
Avenue Apt.103 Davis, CA 95616, E-mail: mhhsu@ucdavis.edu, Tel: +1-925-922-4977
3
Department of International Business, Ming Chuan University, Taiwan, Address: (111) 250 Zhong Shan N.
Rd., Sec. 5, Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C. E-mail: shhu@mail.mcu.edu.tw, Tel: +886-2-28824564
1
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
attitudes (Tatzel, 2003; Durvasula & Lysonski, 2010). More recently, new research studies
have been primarily concerned with tackle the issue of the correlation with materialism and
ethical beliefs (Vitell, 2003). While, interesting in ethical behaviors have shifted to reflect
current developments in ethical beliefs which emphasize moral transgression. Within the
literature on materialism and morality, comparatively little research has focused on the
relation between individual materialism and his/her moral transgression intentions.
In this study, an intervening construct (i.e., moral competence) that might influence the
relationship between individual materialism and his/her moral transgression intentions were
examined. Moral competence is the skill of actually doing the right thing, and we need moral
competence to act in alignment with our values and beliefs (Lennick & Kiel, 2005). To my
knowledge, there has been no prior attempt to test how these combined this intervening
construct moderated the relationship between individual materialism and his/her moral
transgression intentions, that is, individual moral competence buffers the positive influence
of individual materialism on his/her moral transgression intentions. To expand knowledge in
the area, we propose two goals in this study. First, adopting morality approach, we
examined the previously untested relationship between individual materialism to his/her
moral transgression intentions. The second goal of this study is to further examine the
extent to which individual moral competence can act as a buffer against the positive
influence of individual materialism on his/her moral transgression intentions. However,
issues of individual materialism and moral transgression intentions may have sensitized the
participants to provide real responses in the workplace. To overcome this problem, this
study, therefore, used experimental design to explore the impacts of individual materialism,
moral competence on moral transgression intentions.
2. Hypotheses Development
2.1 Individual Materialism
Materialism is a complex, multifaceted concept. For example, Belk (1984) described
materialism as “the importance a consumer attaches to worldly possessions.” Rassuli and
Hollander (1986) defined materialism as “a mind-set or an interest in getting and spending.”
Richins and Dawson (1992) suggested that persons holding strong material values place
possessions and their acquisition at the center of their lives, that they value possessions as
a means of achieving happiness, and that they use possessions as a means of an indicator
of their own and others success. Holtz (1995) described materialism as either a “trait or
values that measures the importance of possessions in one’s life.” Browne and Kaldenberg
(1997) described materialism as “a cluster of related traits, attitudes, and values focusing on
possessions and guiding the selection of events and things.”
There are two major streams in understanding the concept of materialism in literature.
Belk (1985) viewed materialism as a collection of personality traits. His view of materialism
included three traits of possessiveness, non-generosity, and envy. In contrast, Richins and
his colleagues (e.g., Fournier & Richins, 1991; Richins, 1994a, 1994b; Richins & Dawson,
1992) described materialism as a value rather than a behavior or personality variable. This
included beliefs about acquisition centrality and the role of acquisition in happiness and
success. Acquisition centrality refers to the importance materialists attach to acquiring more
possessions which allows acquisitiveness to function as a life-goal for them. Materialists
2
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
also hold strongly to the belief that owning or acquiring the right possessions is a key to
happiness and well-being. Since Richins (1994a, 1994b) defined materialists as people who
believe success can be judged by the things people own. Thereby, Richins and Dawson
(1992) compiled many scholars’ definitions, and suggested materialism can be divided into
acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined
success of three dimensions.
About the measurement of individual materialism, since Belk’s three dimensions of
materialism were more inclined to materialistic negative traits, and less described in positive
traits. In addition, a limitation of the Belk scales has been inconsistent and often low reports
of scale reliability. And the preliminary assessments of scale, which developed by Richins
and Dawson (1992), had acceptable reliability and validity, thereby, we choose Richins and
Dawson’s (1992) scale in this current study.
2.2 Moral Transgression Intentions
In describing one who violates widely accepted moral norms in a manner, theorists have
employed a variety of terms and phrases including “deviant behavior” (Robinson & Bennett,
1995), “counterproductive behavior” (Cohen-Charash & Spector, 2001), “unethical behavior”
(Jones & Kavanagh, 1996), “noncompliant employees” (Rogelberg, Luong, Sederburg, &
Cristol, 2000), “organizational misbehavior” (Ivancevich, Duening Gilbert, & Konopaske,
2003; Vardi & Weitz, 2004), and “moral transgression” (Tumasjan, Strobel, & Welpe, 2011).
In this study, we redefined the term “moral transgression”, which referred to those
individuals who deliberately violates widely accepted moral norms in a manner that
negatively affected other colleagues or the organization as a whole.
Moral transgression at work included, but not limited to the following behaviors: arson,
blackmail, bribery, bullying, cheating, discrimination, dishonesty, espionage, fraud, incivility,
intimidation, kickbacks, lying, misinformation, privacy violations, revenge, sabotage, sexual
harassment, substance abuse, theft, threats, and withholding information (Ivancevich,
Konopaske, & Matteson, 2005). As defined above, this study focuses specifically whether
individual materialism on moral transgression intentions. However, we adopt an existing
moral transgression measure with five latent dimensions (i.e., abuse resources, not whistle
blowing, theft, corruption, and deception) developed by Luna-Arocas and Tang (2004).
2.3 Individual Materialism & Moral Transgression Intentions
As mentioned above, materialism is commonly viewed as a negative value that has
detrimental consequences for both individuals and society (Bakker & Bakker-Rabdau, 1973;
Belk, 1984; Feather, 1984; Furham, 1984; Hogan, 1975; MacDonald, 1972). Belk (1988)
related greater materialism to an inevitable loss of a sense of community which might in
turn make people less sensitive to behavior that might negatively affect others. Rudmin and
Richins (1992) argued that materialism is questionable from an ethical perspective. Barrett
(1992) also indicated that certain unethical behaviors are associated with higher levels of
materialism.
Individual materialism may become a problem in situations where the physical goal of
3
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
consumption overshadows all other goals of self and interactive development (Belk, 1985;
Richins & Dawson, 1992). However, materialism is likely to become harmful to the person
or to society. However, Fournier and Richins (1991) found that most people describe
materialistic people in negative and socially-undesirable terms. In addition, materialism has
been shown to relate to certain demographic and behavioral variables (Crispell, 1993).
Richins and Dawson (1992) suggested that possessions can be the focus of one’s life,
becoming more important than religion, friends and other achievements. The more acquire
possessions the majority component for achieving happiness, the more materialistic
individuals might be willing to bend ethical rules to gain possessions. This reasoning is
consistent with Ferrell and Gresham (1985); they argued that managers who feel pressure
to be successful will be more likely to exhibit unethical behavior.
Research argued that individuals with materialism may have negative attitudes (Belk,
1984), have egoistic self-interest (Hogan, 1975), and act as extreme as vandalism, arson,
murder, theft, and adultery, in order to deprive envied others of their possessions (Bakker &
Bakker-Rabdau, 1973). Thereby, we argued that individuals with higher level of materialism
(i.e., acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, possession-defined
success), they may have greater intentions in moral transgression to obtain these desired
possessions. Thus, we proposed the following:
Hypothesis 1: Individual materialism is positively related to his/her moral transgression
intentions.
2.4 Individual Moral Competence
In order to recognize moral competence, we must clarify the distinction between moral
intelligence and moral competence. Moral intelligence is described as “the mental capacity
to determine how universal human principles should be applied to our values, goals, and
actions.” That is, moral intelligence is the ability to differentiate right from wrong as defined
by universal principles (Lennick & Kiel, 2005). However, moral competence is defined as
“the capacity to make decisions and judgments which are moral (i.e., based on internal
principles) and to act in accordance with such judgments” (Kohlberg, 1964). It means
“ability to act on our moral principles”, while moral intelligence involves knowing what to do,
moral competence is the skill of actually doing the right thing (Lennick & Kiel, 2005). Since
there is a practical distinction between moral intelligence and moral competence, however,
we choose moral competence emphasized as “the ability to act in alignment with moral
judgment” in this study.
Moral competence is a multi-dimensional construct including integrity, responsibility,
compassion, and forgiveness (Lennick & Kiel, 2005). Integrity consists of four related moral
competencies: acting consistently with principles, values, and beliefs, which means being
purposeful in everything one does or says; telling the truth involves the degree to which
provide information that captures reality, even in difficult situations; standing up for what is
right is defined as being an advocate for what one thinks is right as defined by principles;
and keeping promises refers to one’s actions being consistent with words. Responsibility
extends to three related moral competencies: taking responsibility for personal choices
which means assuming accountability for the results of the choices one makes; admitting
mistakes and failures, which involves an acceptance that one has faults; and embracing
4
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
responsibility for serving others, referring to a felt obligation to help others. Compassion is
based on a single principle: actively caring about others, which involves actively supporting
the personal choices of others and being empathetic to needs and desires of others,
sometimes even treating the goals of others as being more important than one’s own goals.
Forgiveness consists of two principles: Letting go of one’s own mistakes means a
willingness to forgive oneself for unacceptable behaviors, which allows for freeing one’s
own mental space to focus on how to learn and improve from the mistake. Letting go of
others’ mistakes is defined as one’s ability to forgive others for what they have done wrong
(Lennick & Kiel, 2005).
2.5 Individual Moral Competence as a Moderator
Moral competence is the skill of actually doing the right thing. That is to say it means the
ability to consistently behave according to accepted ethical principles. According to value
theory, values are regarded as the criteria people use to select and justify actions and to
evaluate people (including the self) and events (Schwartz, 1992). Moral competence, like a
moral compass of value and belief, is considered as the criteria people use to act ethically.
For above mentioned, we need moral competence. We need it to understand what goals
will allow us to be true to our principles, and we need moral competence to act in alignment
with our values and beliefs. When individuals with moral competence, they can align with
their moral compass and have the awareness of moral rules and regulations to construct
right behaviors (Lennick & Kiel, 2005).
As we argued above that there is a positive influence of Individual materialism on moral
transgression intentions. However, if individual materialism with higher moral competence,
he/she will have a better understand what is right or wrongdoing and less likely to intent on
moral transgression. Conversely, when individual materialism with lower moral competence,
they will have no intrinsically moral compass to judge what is right or wrongdoing and likely
to violate widely accepted moral norms in a manner within workplace. Thereby, we propose
the following:
Hypothesis 2: Individual moral competence moderates the relationship between
individual materialism and his/her moral transgression intentions, such
that the relationship is weaker for those with higher moral competence
and stronger for those with lower moral competence.
3. Methodology
3.1 Research Participants
The sample for this study consists of the students of M.B.A. degree program in the northern
schools of management in Taiwan. A total of 400 paper questionnaires were sent out and
388 questionnaires were received. The overall sample size of three hundred and sixty four
completed surveys are analyzed with a response rate of ninety-seven. Among the 364
participants, 64% were female, over half (63%) had at a master degree, and 72% were 2025 years old.
5
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
3.2 Research Design and Process
This study was conducted in the form of a script experiment. Hammond’s (1955) policy
capturing approach was adopted, in which experimenters present stimulus materials
(profiles with various levels) to participants and request them to answer questions based on
each of the profiles. In this study, eight individual profiles were designed based on the three
dimensions of individual materialism: acquisition centrality (high vs low), acquisition as the
pursuit of happiness (high vs low), and possession-defined success (high vs low) (see
Appendix). Each profile represented a combination of one level of each of three dimensions.
All participants were guided that this study was conducted to explore what influences
individual moral transgression intentions.
Each participant was directed to answer the individual information survey and a series
of questions of moral competence about themselves on five-point Likert scales first, and
then were asked to read the role in the script of eight individual profiles randomly arranged,
in which were designed based on the three dimensions of individual materialism: acquisition
centrality (high vs low), acquisition as the pursuit of happiness (high vs low), and
possession-defined success (high vs low), and then to answer a series of questions of the
moral transgression intentions based on the characteristics depicted in the script and three
items used to manipulate the three dimensions on five-point Likert scales: "X puts more
emphasis on material things and enjoys spending money on things that aren't practical."
(acquisition centrality), "X would be any happier if he/she owned nicer things." (acquisition
as the pursuit of happiness), and "X pay much attention to the material objects other people
own and place emphasis on the amount of material objects people own as a sign of
achievement or success." (possession-defined success).
This study used a 222 between-subjects design, with three independent variables
(acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined
success), a dependent variable (moral transgression intentions), and a moderator variable
(individual moral competence). The original script, moral transgression intentions, and
individual moral competence questions were developed in English and then translated into
Chinese, with a native Chinese speaker, who also understood English, editing the grammar
and checking the content, and then back translating to English (Brislin, 1970).
As a pretest, a script and moral transgression intentions scale were developed and
given to thirty subjects to check whether all the manipulations were realistic and whether all
subjects understood the instructions and the purpose of this study. After the pretest, the
questionnaires were mailed to 400 subjects, who did not participate in the pretest, asking
them to complete an anonymous survey.
3.3 Measure of Depend Variable: Moral Transgression Intentions
A total of 15 items, adopted from Luna-Arocas and Tang’s (2004), were used to measure
moral transgression intentions, consisting of abuse resources (“Use public resources for
personal purposes.”), not whistle blowing (“Conceal private error.”), theft (“Embezzle public
equipment.”), corruption (“Gifts or favors in exchange for preferential treatment.”) and
deception (“Take credit for someone else’s work.”). The 15-item questionnaire reflected the
extent to which the individual’s intention to have the unethical behaviors within the
6
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
workplace, as described on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Alpha reliability is measured as 0.96.
3.4 Measure of Moderator Variable: Individual Moral Competence
A total of 10 items, adopted from moral competence inventory (MCI) of Lennick and Kiel’s
(2005), are used to measure individual moral competence, consisting of integrity,
responsibility, compassion, and forgiveness. Sample items are: “I am willing to accept the
consequences of my mistakes.” and “My friends know they can depend on me to be truthful
to them.” and produced an overall internal reliability coefficient of .71.
4. Results
4.1 Manipulation Checks
T-test was used to check the manipulation validity of the scenario scripts of individual
materialism for the samples. First, the results showed a significant difference for the
samples regarding high centrality person and low centrality person, respectively (t = 15.554,
p<.001, MeanHigh Centrality = 4.09, SDHigh Centrality = 1.013; MeanLow Centrality = 2.30, SDLow Centrality
= 1.182). Second, the results showed a significant difference for the samples regarding high
happiness person and low happiness person, respectively (t = 13.463, p<.001, MeanHigh
Happiness = 4.13, SDHigh Happiness = 0.931; MeanLow Happiness = 2.52, SDLow Happiness = 1.324).
Third, the results also showed a significant difference for the samples regarding high
success person and low success person, respectively (t = 14.858, p<.001, MeanHigh Success =
4.04, SDHigh Success = 0.912; MeanLow Success = 2.31, SDLow Success = 1.290).
4.2 Effects of Individual Materialism on Moral Transgression Intentions
The means and standard deviations are presented in Table 1. With respect to the moral
transgression intentions for each of the eight people with individual materialism, the results
show an order C>A>G>E>B>D>H>F under the moral transgression intentions. Meanwhile,
the results showed that acquisition centrality and possession-defined success of individual
materialism had distinguishable effects on the moral transgression intentions (see Table 2).
Since this study used a three-dimension between-subjects design, ANCONA of
General Linear Model (GLM) to test the study’s two hypotheses, using the individual’s
gender, age, and educational level as control variables. The results showed that the main
effects of acquisition centrality (F=29.950, p<0.001, 2=0.078) and possession-defined
success (F=60.284, p<0.001, 2=0.146) of individual materialism, were significant
respectively (see Table 2). It appears that individual moral transgression intentions
according a higher percentage to individual with a high acquisition centrality and high
possession-defined success. H1 was partially supported.
7
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
Table 1. Means and Standard Deviations of the Dimensions of Individual Materialism and
Moral Transgression Intentions
High Centrality
Dimensions
High Happiness
Low Happiness
High Happiness
Low Happiness
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
Success
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
M
52.42
45.50
53.21
41.47
46.17
38.63
46.18
35.02
SD
11.60
13.17
10.12
9.63
10.33
10.74
12.13
11.93
Dependent
Variable
Moral
Low Centrality
Transgression
Intentions
Note: M = mean, SD = standard deviation, the sample size of each cell is 364.
Table 2. Results of Repeated Measures GLM involving all Variables (N=364)
Variables
Controls
Gender
Age
Education
Acquisition Centrality (A)
Acquisition as the Pursuit of Happiness (B)
Possession-defined Success (C)
Moral Transgression Intentions
F
2
1.392
.478
9.013**
29.950***
1.922
60.284***
0.004
0.001
0.025
0.078
0.005
0.146
1.857*
1.776*
1.937*
0.123
0.113
0.115
Moral Competence (D)
AD
BD
CD
Note: 1. η2 shows effect size.
2. * p<0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p<0.001.
8
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
Figure 1. Interaction Plot for Moral Competence as a
Figure 2. Interaction Plot for Moral Competence as
Moderator between Acquisition Centrality of
a Moderator between Pursue Happiness of
Materialism and Moral Transgression Intentions
Materialism and Moral Transgression Intentions
Figure 3. Interaction Plot for Moral Competence as a
Moderator between Possession-defined Success of
Materialism and Moral Transgression Intentions
4.3 Individual Materialism, Moral Competence and Moral Transgression
Intentions
Moreover, we examined the effects of individual moral competence (called as MC) (low vs.
high) on moral transgression intentions. Results showed that individual moral competence
(low/high) significantly moderated the effects of acquisition centrality (called as Centrality),
acquisition as the pursuit of happiness (called as Happiness), and possession-defined
success (called as Success) (CentralityMC (F=1.857, p<0.5, 2=0.123), Happiness MC
(F=1.776, p<0.5, 2=0.113), CentralityMC (F=1.937, p<0.5, 2=0.115); see Figure 2). As
individual with high MC, the difference between low and high Centrality was larger than
individual with low MC (difference in high MC=4.76; difference in low MC=0.38) toward
moral transgression intentions. Similarly, individual Happiness was less likely to intent on
moral transgression with high MC than with low MC (difference in high MC=1.92; difference
in low MC=1.13). As for individual Success, the difference between the high and low
individual Success was larger high MC than with low MC (difference in high MC=1.86;
9
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
difference in low MC=0.48). Thus, H2 was fully supported.
5. Discussion
The purpose of this current study was to explore the effects of individual materialism (i.e.,
acquisition centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined
success) on his/her moral transgression intentions using a policy capturing approach. The
results supported the partial hypotheses presented; implying that only acquisition centrality
and possession-defined success of materialism had the main effects on individual moral
transgression intentions, respectively. But the findings demonstrated that acquisition as the
pursuit of happiness of individual materialism did not explain significant variances in moral
transgression intentions. This is somewhat unexpected with our assumption. The potential
explanation is that materialists might seek the proper way to extend the well-being of life,
such as work hard to earn more wages in order to buy more luxuries. When the materialists
lacked for happiness and well-being, they usually find a legitimate means in increasing their
wealth and material possessions in order to obtain the pleasure or self-happiness. They did
not exactly to intent on moral transgression (e.g., abuse Resources and theft) to accomplish
these purposes.
Though some studies argued that materialism is not necessarily either good or bad
(e.g., Belk, 1984, 1985), however, this study mainly focuses on individual materialistic
negative traits to explore individual moral transgression intentions. In other words,
individuals with higher materialistic values of acquisition centrality and possession-defined
success are most prone to have egoistic self-interest (Hogan, 1975) and engaged on moral
transgression intentions (Bakker & Bakker-Rabdau, 1973). The findings are consistent with
an ethical perspective, which emphasize that materialism is commonly viewed as a
negative value (Bakker & Bakker-Rabdau, 1973; Belk, 1984; Feather, 1984; Furham, 1984;
Hogan, 1975; MacDonald, 1972) and certain unethical behaviors are associated with higher
levels of materialism (Barrett, 1992; Belk, 1988; Rudmin & Richins, 1992). The results also
showed that the effect size of possession-defined success was the highest among the three
dimensions of individual materialism, meaning that individual with higher transgression
intentions are influenced by higher materialistic values of possession-defined success.
In addition, this study also explored individual moral competence as a moderator on the
relationship between these three dimensions of materialism and moral transgression
intentions. The findings showed that individuals with higher moral competence can weaken
the positive relationships between individual materialistic value of both acquisition centrality
and possession-defined success of materialism and their moral transgression intentions.
According to value theory, values are regarded as the criteria people use to select and
justify actions and to evaluate people (including the self) and events (Schwartz, 1992).
Moral competence, like a moral compass of value and belief, is considered as the criteria
people use to act ethically. When individuals with higher moral competence, they are
expected to represent ethical behavior, and less likely violate widely accepted moral norms
in a manner within workplace (Lennick & Kiel, 2005). In other word individual with higher
moral competence can buffer the positive influence of individual materialism on his/her
moral transgression intentions than individuals with lower moral competence. The study
supported Lennick and Kiel (2005) proposition of moral competence acting in alignment
with our moral compass. Thus, if individuals with higher moral competence, they are likely
10
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
to follow the principles and norms within organizations, and are less inclined to act in moral
transgressions. The study results also implied that individual differential is intuitively based
on cognition and capability of moral competence.
5.1 Research Contribution and Limitations
Prior research on individual materialism has tended to focus more on a variety of consumer
behaviors with potentially negative outcomes (Chang & Arkin, 2002; Chaplin & John, 2007;
Deci & Ryan, 1995; Durvasula & Lysonski, 2010; Fitzmaurice & Comegys, 2006; Kashdan
& Breen, 2007; Rindfleisch, Burroughs & Denton, 1997; Roberts, Manolis & Tanner, 2003;
Schroeder & Dugal, 1995; Tatzel, 2003). There have been far less research on the effects
of individual materialism in moral transgression intentions (Vitell, 2003). However, this study
explored how three dimensions of individual materialism (acquisition centrality, acquisition
as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success) affect moral transgression
intentions in order to clarify the complexity of materialism in behaviors of human beings.
Secondly, some researchers have claimed that moral competence is a very important issue
to act in alignment with the values and beliefs (Lennick & Kiel, 2005), but very few studies
have examined its effects. This current study represented an attempt to examine the joint
effects of individual moral competence and materialism on the intentions of moral
transgression. Meanwhile, the results showed that individual moral competence serves as a
neutralizer when it was high. However, moral competence, a multi-dimensional construct
including integrity, responsibility, compassion, and forgiveness (Lennick & Kiel, 2005),
attention being neutralized by moral transgression intentions, can be viewed as a moral
compass of value and belief, and then feel a responsibility to avoid the intentions on moral
transgression in spite they moral suffered moral dilemma. That is to say, from the
perspective of morality perspective, moral competence involved the recognition that in order
to survive in a judgment of moral transgression situation, and then minimized the moral
transgression intentions because of high moral judgment ability. Hence, companies may
consider this behavioral persistence ability of moral competence as a potentially important
topic on individual training and development.
Although this study identified significant cognitive differences on moral transgression
intentions based on different values of individual materialism, there are several limitations in
such studies. First, this study was designed as simulated script experiment, and requested
subjects to use their imagination to carry out the experiment beyond their organizations.
Thus the survey subjects did not physically interact with the role described in the script
experiment, and so a deviation between the experimental context and real life can be
expected. Another limitation of this study is the manipulation of acquisition centrality,
acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success of individual
materialism variables on two levels--“high” vs. “low”. However, experimental manipulation of
the independent variable might be too brief. Although it could achieve the purpose of the
experiment manipulation, but from the perspective of real life, people should not only two
extreme levels, it should have more degree of distinction. Moreover, the sample population
only consisted of the M.B.A. students in the northern schools of management in Taiwan,
thereby; the results may be somewhat limited in their generalizability. This issue could be
addressed in future research with a larger sample across a broader range.
Aside from these limitations, this study points to some areas worthy of future research.
11
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
First, whether moral transgression intentions were influenced by individual materialism? If
different individuals have different values and beliefs, then what else is the other factors
influencing individual moral transgression intentions? Thereby, it’s worthwhile to further
examine if there any other inner motives or factors that might stand out as an intermediary
factor in the individual moral transgression intentions. As this research was a horizontaltype design, and could not present individual’s inner process for the formation of acquisition
centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success of
individual materialism, and could not express the dynamic change of the relationship
between individual materialism and his/her moral transgression intentions. Thus, the future
research can endeavor by utilizing the longitudinal observation or follow-up research
method to examine the formation processed by the individual for their degree of acquisition
centrality, acquisition as the pursuit of happiness, and possession-defined success and the
dynamic change of individual moral transgression intentions.
References
Bakker, C. B. and Bakker-Rabdau M K. (1973). No Trespassing! Explorations in Human
Territoriality, San Francisco, CA: Chandler.
Barrett, A. (1992). Crime Waves Spread very Democratically In Czechoslovakia; Even
Toilet Paper Is Locked Away As New Breed of Thief Hails Western Materialism. The Wall
Street Journal, B7B.
Belk, R. W. (1984). Three Scales to Measure Constructs Related to Materialism: Reliability,
Validity, and Relationships to Measures of Happiness. Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 11, ed. Thomas Kinnear, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
291-297.
Belk, R. W. (1985). Materialism: Trait Aspects of Living in the Material World. Journal of
Consumer Research, 12 (December), 265-280.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Third World Consumer Culture. Research in Marketing, Suppl. 4, ed.
Erdogan Kumcu and A. Fuat Firat, Greenwich, CT: JAI, 113-127.
Brislin, R. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 1, 185-216.
Browne, B. A. and Kaldenberg, D. O. (1997). Conceptualizing Self-Monitoring: Links to
Materialism and Product Involvement. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(1), 3-44.
Chang, L. C., and Arkin R. M. (2002). Materialism as an Attempt to Cope with Uncertainty.
Psychology & Marketing, 19(5), 389-406.
Chaplin, L. N., and John, D. R. (2007). Growing up in a material world: Age differences in
materialism in children and adolescents. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 480-493.
Cohen-Charash, Y. and Spector, P. E. ( 2001). The Role of Justice in Organizations: A
Meta-Analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 27812
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
321.
Crispell, D. (1993). Materialism among minorities; Blacks are the most likely to say “flaunt it”,
Asians are the least. American Demographics, 15(8), 14-16.
Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M.
Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31-49). New York: Plenum
Publishing Co.
Durvasula, S., and Lysonski, S. (2010). Diagnosing service quality in retailing: The case of
Singapore. Journal of International Business and Entrepreneurship Development, 5
(1), 1-17.
Ferrell, O. C., and Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding
ethical decision making in marketing, Journal of Marketing, 49(3), 87-96.
Fitzmaurice, J., and Comegys, C. (2006). Materialism and social consumptions. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 14(4), 287-299.
Fournier, S. and Richins, M. L. (1991). Some theoretical and popular notions concerning
materialism. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6, 403-414.
Furham, A. (1984). The Protestant Ethic: A Review of the Psychological Literature.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 14(1), 87-104.
Hammond, K. R. (1955). Probabilistic functioning and the clinical method. Psychological
Review, 62, 255-262.
Hogan, R. (1975). Theoretical Egocentrism and the Problem of Compliance. American
Psychologist, 30(4), 522-540.
Holtz, G. T. (1995). Welcome to the jungle: The why behind generation x, New York, NY:
St. Martin’s Griffin.
Ivancevich, J. M., Duening, T. N., Gilbert J. A., and Konopaske, R. (2003). Deterring whitecollar crime. Academy of Management Executive, 17, 114-127.
Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., and Matteson, M. T. (2005). Organizational Behavior
and Management (7th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Jones, G. E. and Kavanagh, M. J. (1996). An experimental examination of the effects of
individual and situational factors on unethical behavioral intentions in the workplace.
Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 511-523.
Kashdan, T. B., and Breen, W. E. (2007). Materialism and diminished well-being:
Experiential avoidance as a mediating mechanism. Journal of Social and Clinical
Psychology, 26, 521-539.
Kohlberg, L. (1964). Development of moral character and moral ideology. M.L. Hoffman &
L.W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of Child Development Research, (Vol. 1). New
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 383-431.
Luna-Arocas, R., and Tang, T. L. P. (2004). The love of money, satisfaction, and the
13
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
protestant work ethic: Money profiles among university professors in the USA and Spain.
Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 329-354.
MacDonald, A. P., Jr. (1972). More on the Protestant Ethic. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 39 (2), 222-234.
Pitts, R. E. and Woodside, A. G. (1991). Special issues: Examining the structure of personal
values and consumer decision making. Journal of Business Research, 22, 91-93.
Rassuli, K. M. and Hollander, S. C. (1986). Desire—induced, innate, insatiable? Journal of
Macromarketing, 6 (Fall), 4-24.
Richins, M. L. and Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its
measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19
(December), 303-316.
Richins, Marsha L. (1994a). Special Possessions and the Expression of Material Value.
Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (December), 522-533.
Richins, Marsha L. (1994b). Valuing things: The public and private meanings of
possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (December), 504-521.
Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs J. E., and Denton F. (1997). Family structure, materialism, and
compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 23, 312-25.
Roberts, J. A., Manolis, C., and Tanner, J. F. Jr. (2003). Family structure, materialism, and
compulsive buying, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(3), 300-311.
Rogelberg, S. G., Luong, A., Sederburg, M. E., and Cristol, D. S. (2000). Employee attitude
surveys: Examining the attitudes of noncompliant employees. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 85, 284-293.
Rokeach, M. (1973). Nature of human values, New York: Free Press.
Rudmin, F. W., and Richins M. (1992). Meaning Measures, and Morality of Materialism,
Association for Consumer Research, Provo, UT.
Schroeder, J. E., and Dugal S. S. (1995). Psychological correlates of the materialism
construct. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(1), 243-253.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the context and structure of values: Theory and
empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
(Vol. 25, pp. 1-65). New York: Academic Press.
Tatzel, M. (2003a). [Review of Sirgy, J. M. (2001). Quality of life research: An ethical
marketing perspective]. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4(2), 235-239.
Tumasjan, A., Strobel, M., and Welpe, I. (2011). Ethical leadership evaluations after moral
transgression: Social distance makes the difference. Journal of Business Ethics,
99,609-622.
Vardi, Y., and Weitz, E. (2004). Misbehavior in Organizations, Lawrence Erlbaum,
Mahwah, NY.
14
Proceedings of 10th Global Business and Social Science Research Conference
23 -24 June 2014, Radisson Blu Hotel, Beijing, China, ISBN: 978-1-922069-55-9
Vitell, S. J. (2003). Consumer ethics research: Review, synthesis and suggestions for the
future. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 33-47.
Appendix
High
Acquisition Centrality
Low
He/she puts more emphasis
He/she puts less emphasis
on material things and enjoys on material things and
spending money on things
that aren’t practical.
usually buys only the things
he/she need.
He/she wouldn’t be any
Acquisition as the
He/she would be any happier
Pursuit of Happiness
if he/she owned nicer things.
happier if he/she owned nicer
things.
He/she pays much attention
to the material objects other
people own and place much
emphasis on the amount of
material objects people own
as a sign of achievement or
He/she doesn’t pay much
attention to the material
objects other people own and
doesn’t place much
emphasis on the amount of
material objects people own
as a sign of achievement or
Possession-defined
Success
success.
success.
15