Abstract
AbstractMuch of the empirical research on corruption for the past 45 years has focused on perception-based definitions and measurements. Citizens’ perceptions, their attitudes and (self)reported experiences of corruption have been widely studied through different perception-based measures obtained in surveys, interviews, and experiments applied to citizens in general, and experts, business leaders, politicians, or public officials. Notwithstanding the significant progress made to understand the complexity of citizens’ understandings, judgements and practices, we are still unable to decipher by what criteria they establish what is or is not corruption and what types of corruption are susceptible of being condemned/tolerated. This paper makes an innovative contribution to fill this gap. We propose a methodological design to identify and measure different perception-based definitions of corruption based on two contrasting normative perspectives: deontological and consequentialist ethics. We identified four groups: the Virtuous; the Intransigent; the Pragmatic; and the Hypocrite. Using survey data from a national sample of Portuguese citizens, we employ discriminant analysis and logistic regression models to differentiate individual profiles in terms of process- and outcome-based social definitions of corruption and explore the explanatory factors that account for these different conceptualisations and their different degree of tolerance towards corruption.
Funder
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
Universidad de Murcia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology
Reference87 articles.
1. Alatas, S. H. (1968). The sociology of corruption: the nature causes and prevention of corruption. Donald Moore Press, Singapore.
2. Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2007). Deontological Ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 202).
3. Alexander, Larry and Moore, M. (2021) ‘Deontological Ethics’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = .
4. Allen, N., & Birch, S. (2015). Ethics and integrity in British politics. Cambridge University Press.
5. Amini, C., & Douarin, E. (2020). Corruption and life satisfaction in transition: Is corruption a social norm y Eastern Europe? Social Indicators Research, 151, 723–766.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献