I
Veni, Vidi, Nesci
I came, I saw, I didn’t know what to do
A research on the behavior of accounting students faced with ethical dilemmas
Maaike Kogelman MSc. Accountancy S2223171
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Faculty of Economics and Business 1st Tutor: Drs. M.M. Bergervoet 2nd Tutor: Dr. K.G.B. Linke
II
Be thankful when you don’t know something For it gives you the opportunity to learn.
Be thankful for the difficult times.
During those times you grow.
Be thankful for your limitations
Because they give you opportunities for improvement.
Be thankful for each new challenge
Because it will build your strength and character.
Be thankful for your mistakes They will teach you valuable lessons.
Be thankful when you’re tired and weary Because it means you’ve made a difference.
It is easy to be thankful for the good things.
A life of rich fulfillment comes to those who are
also thankful for the setbacks.
III
Preface
It was a cold Wednesday morning in February. Students were sitting in the classroom wearing warm woolen sweaters and scarves. It had been one of the coldest February months in years and the students were longing for some spring warmth to cheer them up. As part of the internship for my teacher’s degree I gave a class to junior students of a local high school. I was not yet aware that I would soon be discussing the sensitive subject of ethics in healthcare with my students. I had just explained the different kinds of insurances to the students and we discussed the differences between a basic healthcare insurance and a supplementary healthcare insurance. The topic of the conversation deviated to the option for insurance companies to ask different premiums from different people for the same supplementary insurance.
The students discussed whether it was fair that an old lady with health problems could be charged extra for a supplementary health insurance. A young girl stated fiercely: “Of course not! You cannot and may not blame the old lady for her deteriorating health as she is aging!” The girl got a reply from a boy who lifted his hand up in the air and asked his fellow classmates: “But what if she purposely lived very unhealthy? Smoked like a smokestack and never exercised? Shouldn’t we reward people who do their best to live healthy?” A third student replied: “Sure, but how would you rate unhealthy behavior? Should we label every action we could possibly undertake as healthy or unhealthy and calculate an average for each person? And what if you get injured whilst exercising?”
The discussion showed ethics are an important part of our everyday life. Ethics are the foundation of laws, rules and governmental systems. We all have a feeling for morality and just and unjust within us. Morality is the feeling that makes us experience feelings of wrongdoing. When cyclist Mark Cavendish recklessly shoved fellow cyclist Tom Veelers of his bike and sent him crashing into the concrete pavement with a speed of 60km/hr in a sprint in the Tour de France 2013, thousands of angry fans demanded Cavendish’s disqualification.
It is this feeling of morality that made the students question to what extent it is acceptable to present people with the bill of their healthcare. It is the same feeling that accountants are expected to feel when they are faced with unethical behavior. But to what extent is behavior unethical? Of course, Cavendish sending a fellow cyclist from his saddle into the concrete and stumbling to the medical booth isn’t anywhere near ethical racing. It’s an obvious case of bad sportsmanship. However, there do exist many ‘grey’ areas where right and wrong are not as evident as they were in Cavendish’ case.
This thesis is all about those grey areas. It’s about the person who helps his friend by providing him with an illegal software package and about the student who is told by his superior ‘nothing is wrong’ while he senses that there is. In my research I asked students for their honest opinions on these and many other situational vignettes. The findings were interesting and sometimes surprising. They will be outlined in this thesis. Happy reading!
IV
Acknowledgments
No thesis is written without the help from others. Not this one at least. I would like to thank all the people who
generously dedicated their precious time and energy to help me with my research and the writing of my thesis. Whether you know it or not, you have helped me tremendously.
First and foremost I want to express my gratitude to my tutor Mr. Bergervoet. I want to thank you for your guidance and sincere advices. Sometimes you told me exactly what I did not want to hear, but you taught me that helping someone means that you have to tell a person what he needs to hear even if that may differ from what he wants to hear. Your advice has helped me write a much better thesis than I would have done without it. I also want to express my gratitude to Mrs. Linke. I want to thank you for your support and guidance. Dear tutors, both of you have been the figurative hand on my shoulder, the little pat on the back that told me that I could actually write this thesis and the finger pointing me in the right direction when I lost sight of my goals. Thank you for your extensive help and guidance.
I want to thank my friends and my beloved boyfriend. All of you went out of your way to help me write this thesis. Not only did you proofread it. (Thanks Gergö!) You also provided me with a laptop, fixed it when it was broken and even borrowed me yours in the meantime. (Sincere thanks to Menno, Marcel and Marco for this!) You also cheered me up last November when, before actually starting the research, I lost nearly all my self-confidence and the idea of writing a thesis started to feel like ‘The phantom of the Thesis – a scary musical in two parts’. (Wholehearted thanks to Marloes, Frances and Leonie for being the best friends a girl could wish for!) Believe me guys, you have no idea how much all your support means to me. So to make it obvious to you, I am stating it here once more. Thank you. Thank you for all those years filled with precious moments, laughter and fun. Thank you for your support and your friendship. You are very cherished.
Last, but never least, a big hug and thank you goes out to my loving parents. The road up ‘till now hasn’t always been easy. The road was paved with setbacks and many anxious sleepless nights fearing gruesome accounting exams. Still you always stood beside me and you always believed in me. The belief you had in me made me believe in myself. I am endlessly grateful for the helping hand you always gave me. As you are reading this thesis I hope that you realize that your support and encouragement helped me get this far. You are forever in my heart.
Gonna try with a little help from my friends Yes, I get by with a little help from my friends
V
Abstract
It is important to obtain information about a student’s ability to recognize ethical dilemmas. Currently there is little information about the ethical views of accountancy and controlling students of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. This research is developed to obtain information about the ethical views of the students, and how these views correlate with demographical factors like age, gender and level of education and correlate with the respondent’s personality traits.
Students majoring in accountancy, controlling or business economics were asked to fill out a survey where their ability to recognize and rate unethical behavior as such was tested.
The students were asked to rate 20 vignettes concerning unethical behavior. They were asked to rank the degree to which they considered the behavior described in each vignette to be ethically acceptable, by using a seven point Likert scale. A higher average score of a student showed the student generally identified and rated more vignettes as unethical behavior. This test was combined with a Big Five Inventory test. The BFI measures the score of a respondent on the following personality traits: extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience.
Over 200 students filled out the survey, after eliminating incomplete surveys 198 remaining surveys were found eligible for examination.
My research showed that female students achieved significantly higher ethical scores than their male counterparts.
Female bachelor and master students significantly outscored their fellow male classmates. However, there exists no significant difference in the mean ethics scores for male and female post-master students.
For the male students there exists a highly significant correlation of +0,226 between their age and ethics score. For female students there is no significant correlation found between their age and ethics score. A significant correlation between the score on conscientiousness and ethics was found for male students. This correlation is +0,297. For females this correlation exists too, but it is much weaker and not significant.
VI
Table of contents
PREFACE... III
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... IV
ABSTRACT ... V
1. INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS ... 10
1.1 Introduction ... 10
1.2 Background to the problem ... 12
1.3 Conceptual background ... 13
1.4 The link between ethics and personality ... 13
1.5 Statement of the problem ... 14
1.6 Purpose of the study ... 14
1.7 Research question ... 14
1.8 Key definitions ... 14
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 15
2.1 An introduction to moral philosophy ... 15
2.1.1 Just and unjust ... 15
2.1.2 Virtue ethics ... 16
2.1.3 Consequentialism ... 16
2.1.4 Egoism ... 17
2.1.5 Utilitarianism ... 18
2.1.6 Deontology ... 19
2.2 Descriptive ethics ... 20
2.2.1 An introduction to descriptive ethics ... 20
2.2.2 Kohlberg ... 20
2.2.3 Rest ... 21
2.3 An introduction to personality trait theory ... 23
VII
2.3.1 Five factor theory of personality... 23
2.3.2 Neuroticism ... 23
2.3.3 Extraversion... 24
2.3.4 Agreeableness ... 24
2.3.5 Openness to experience ... 24
2.3.6 Conscientiousness/Undirectedness ... 25
2.4 Hypotheses ... 25
2.4.1 Personal characteristics... 25
2.4.2 Personality traits ... 26
3. RESEARCH DESIGN... 29
3.1 Research design ... 29
3.2.1 Vignettes ... 29
3.2.2 Big Five Inventory ... 30
3.2.3 Demographical questions ... 31
3.3 Participants ... 31
3.4 Data collection ... 31
3.5 The Sample ... 32
3.5.1 Demographical data of all respondents ... 32
3.6 Data preparation ... 32
3.6.1 Vignettes ... 32
3.6.2 Big Five Inventory ... 32
3.7 Procedure for testing hypotheses ... 33
3.7.1 Normal distribution ... 33
3.7.2 Hypothesis testing ... 33
4. ANALYSIS OF DATA ... 35
4.1 Answering research questions concerning ethics and demographical factors ... 35
4.1.1 Gender ... 35
4.1.2 Level of education ... 36
4.1.3 Age ... 38
4.1.4 Work experience ... 39
4.1.5 Educational specialization ... 39
4.2 Answering research questions concerning ethics and personality traits ... 40
VIII
4.2.1 Ethics and personality for both female and male students ... 40
4.2.2 Ethics and personality for female students ... 41
4.2.3 Ethics and personality for male students ... 41
4.2.4 Means scores per trait for female and male students ... 41
4.4 Discussions ... 41
4.4.1 The correlation between the age and ethical views... 41
4.4.2 The decrease in ethical views for post-master female students ... 42
4.4.3 The influence of conscientiousness on a male respondent’s ethical views ... 43
4.5 Limitations of the research ... 44
4.5.1 Pre-master students ... 44
4.5.2 Business administration majors ... 44
4.5.3 No master students majoring in business economics ... 44
4.5.5 The correlation between different personality traits ... 44
4.5.6 A comparison of the BFI of the respondents and the average for (young) adults ... 44
4.5.3 Age categories as ordinal data ... 44
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH .... 46
5.1 Conclusions ... 46
5.3 Recommendations for further research ... 46
5.3.1 The significant difference in disapproval of gender based discrimination ... 46
5.3.2 The influence of awareness of codes of conduct on students ... 47
5.3.3 The significant correlation between the age and ethics score of male students ... 47
5.3.4 The effect of work-experience for both male and female students ... 47
REFERENCES... 48
APPENDICES ... 55
Appendix I. Means per vignette ... 55
Appendix II. Survey in English ... 56
Appendix III. Survey in Dutch ... 61
Appendix VI. Demograpical data ... 66
Appendix V. Q-Q plots ... 69
Appendix VI. Summary of hypotheses ... 70
IX Appendix VII. Tables from Analysis ... 72
10
1. Introduction to the thesis
1.1 Introduction
During the writing of this thesis thousands of Dutch young high-school students were fretting about their final exams.
Of course there is no such thing as a stress-free high school exam. The seemingly endless amount of literature, notes and studying is enough to send even the best straight-A student into sleepless nights filled with books and sugary energy drinks. However, this year’s exam stress was quite different from the usual worrisome weeks before the graduation ceremony. At the end of May all students taking the A-level French exam got an unpleasant surprise the evening before their initial exam. The day before the exam was scheduled to take place a whistle-blower leaked the exam online. The government was forced to delay the exam for one day and to present a different exam to all students. Over 17.000 students were forced to delay their holidays, call off their appointments and stress another day before taking their final A-level.
In the weeks following the exam the situation emerged to be the biggest exam-fraud ever known in Dutch history. It turned out that three students stole a total of 27 exams from the school’s safety deposit. On the 22nd of June 2013 the
‘Algemeen Dagblad’, a Dutch newspaper, published a large article based on a police report of the theft. The newspaper stated that in the weeks prior to the exams the students entered their school by climbing the roof and entering through a window. The students stole the exams, opened the packaging, copied the exams, put the exams back in the packaging, glued the packaging back together and putted the original exams back in the safety deposit of their school. Afterwards the students figured out the answers of the exams and sold them to other students for prices varying from 20 euro up to 250 euro per exam. One of the students responsible for the theft, a girl taking her A-levels, figured out the answers of her exam and made a sound file of the spoken answers. During her exam she hid her music player beneath her headscarf and listened to the answers of the exam.
A police investigation revealed that during the exams many teachers claimed to be taken aback by the strong glue on the packaging of the exams. They found it harder than usual to open the packages and suspected that the exams were glued by someone else than the official exam board. The teachers also noticed that the packaging of one exam looked heavily damaged on the outside. Several students noticed the astonished look on their teachers’ faces at the start of their exams and held their breath. Would the teachers notice that the exams were stolen and copied before the start of the exams?
Afterwards, it turned out that the teachers had noticed that the packages of exams had been opened. However, the school board failed to notice the inspection about this. It was only after an anonymous whistleblower posted a copy of the final exam French that the case received national attention. The police decided to start an investigation and numerous sources swiftly led to the discovery of the theft of the exams.
One of the immediate questions that came up was “why?” Insiders, who knew one of the thieves, an 18-year old girl, reported to the press that they just couldn’t imagine that she would steal the exams. They explained that she would not have needed the stolen exams for passing her finals. She would have passed anyway.
Cheating an exam is the easy way out for someone who is too afraid to trust his own abilities. Hard work and stress are inextricably linked to any study and it is something students will just have to deal with. There is no doubt that someone taking advantage of a stolen exam is acting in an unethical manner. But how about the student who, during an exam,
11 overhears a fellow student whispering an answer to another student? The student did not actively engage in unethical behavior, but got accidentally involved by overhearing the answer. If the student decided to change his own answer to the answer he overheard, is he engaging in unethical behavior or is he just acting on an opportunistic situation? And how about the student who got a higher grade, just because the teacher liked him better? Should he go back and demand a lower grade, or should he not be blamed for the teacher favoring him? While the first case, the stolen exams, is obviously an example of highly unethical behavior, the other cases lie in a grey area of ethics.
In the audit practice ethics play a vital role. Over half a decade ago researcher Carl Devine (1960) stated: ‘‘Let us now turn to that part of accounting which is related directly to the psychological reactions of those who consume accounting output or are caught in its threads of control. On balance it seems fair to conclude that accountants seem to have waded through their relationships to the intricate psychological network of human activity with a heavy-handed crudity that is beyond belief. Some degree of crudity may be excused in a new discipline, but failure to recognize that much of what passes as accounting theory is hopelessly entwined with unsupported behavior assumptions is unforgivable.’’ In his statement Devine points out to us that auditors are obligated to behave ethically whilst performing their audits.
In 1941, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) defined accounting as: “The art of recording, classifying, and summarizing in a significant manner and in terms of money, transactions and events which are, in part, at least, of a financial character, and interpreting the results thereof.” The definition states accounting is not a science, but an art instead. And an art it is. When I was studying for my bachelor’s degree, one of my professors used to tell us, students: “sales can be calculated, but remember, profit is an opinion.” The professor wanted to get us thinking about the difference between accounting and mathematics. The difference between both is recognizable in subjects like fair value. Fair value is both a calculation and an opinion. For example, the value of a production company may differ as a result of different accounting theories being used by the accountant to value the assets of the company. Every
accounting student is being taught and trained to make adequate ´professional judgments´, whereas the term ‘judgment’
highlights the subjective interpretation of topics like ‘fair value’, ‘estimated accruals’ and the recording of ‘expected implementation costs’.
The (inter)national codes of conduct are a frequently reoccurring subject in the education of any auditor to point out the importance of ethical behavior. (Aspiring) auditors are instructed that the view “If it’s not forbidden (by law), it’s allowed” is not a golden rule for behaving ethically. Former SEC-chairman Richard C. Breeden highlighted the great importance of personal ethics when he stated: “It is not an adequate ethical standard to aspire to get through the day without being indicted”. The vast number of regulations and codes of conduct show the importance of behaving pro- socially. Still, there exists a grey area about what’s right and what isn’t. It is important for students to receive guidance and training so they can find their ways through all the grey areas that can make accounting very complex. My research will provide the university with an inside look on the different views from (under-/post-) graduate students on
(un)ethical behavior. It will provide an insight on the way views might change during one’s study and the number of ethics classes one has taken. My study identifies the ethical principles of students and lays the ground for further research on students’ views of morality and ethical behavior.
My research will focus on the ability of accounting students to recognize and rate unethical behavior as such. This is very important because, as I will substantiate further on, the first step to ethical behavior is to recognize unethical
12 behavior and disapprove of it. For my research I will be looking at (under-/post-) graduate students majoring in
accountancy, controlling and business economics. I will try to find out how their understanding of unethical behavior has developed and how they are inclined to respond to ethical dilemmas.
1.2 Background to the problem
Over the past decade the examples of unethical behavior have been widespread. The cases varied from the shocking corporate scandals like Enron, WorldCom and Parmalat to the disturbing resignation letter from Goldman Sachs executive director Greg Smith. Smith posted the letter on the cover of the New York Times, one year ago1. The letter reveals in several ways how one’s view of ethical behavior directly influences one’s actions. The first step in their abridgement is crucial for behaving pro-socially and in a morally accepted way. To behave in a morally accepted way you have to possess the abilities to recognize ethical behavior and to restrain yourself from acting in an unethical way.
Smith states in his letter: “The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.” This shows how the ethical beliefs of Mr. Smith no longer complied with the view he was forced to take when working at the Goldman Sachs bank, and why he decided to resign from his job. He underlines that if employees are not trained to recognize or regard unethical behavior as unethical, they will not act in an ethical way: “These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is,
“How much money did we make off the client?” It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave”. The employees are provided with an image of unethical behavior which their superiors portray as ethical nevertheless. When you are confronted with a social environment that classifies unethical behavior as (socially) accepted you find yourself at risk of failing to identify the behavior as unethical.
Both future employees and clients expect auditors and controllers to behave ethical. Society expects nothing less of them than a perfect ethical view. Cases like Enron and Parmalat have badly affected society’s view of accountants2. The current (and future) generation of accountants have to cope with the consequences and have a lot of making up to do. In the aftermath of Enron, on 30 July 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was introduced. The introduction of the Sarbanes- Oxley Act came in the wake of Enron and was aimed at improving the quality, reliability, integrity, and transparency of financial reports. The devastating stories of auditors singlehandedly shredding papers and throwing them in the bin effectively destroyed all trust people had in accountant Arthur Anderson. The Sarbanes-Oxley act implemented new rules which were expected to create an environment that promotes strong marketplace integrity, improves the probability of detection and deterrence of corporate misstatements, and restores public trust in the quality and transparency of financial information. (Wells, 2011, p. 278-279) Cases like Enron showcased accountants with a lack of respect to the codes of conduct and moral behavior. Worldwide codes of conduct are created to increase auditor’s awareness of ethical behavior and to obligate the auditor to act in a morally accepted manner. The fact that immoral behavior receives such regular attention worldwide is as a proof that research of auditor’s assessment of immoral behavior is an important research area.
1 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/14/opinion/why-i-am-leaving-goldman-sachs.html, consulted 18 June 2013
2 Parma’s football team has not been the same since, either.
13
1.3 Conceptual background
In their study “A study of whistleblowing among trainee auditors”, N. Brennan and J. Kelly (2007) investigate the behavior of students. Their research is concentrated on whistleblowing amongst audit trainees. In the decision to blow a whistle ethical views and beliefs are key. If you consider a situation to be ethical you will not feel the need to act in a different, more ethical way or to blow a whistle. This first and critical step of identifying a situation as (highly)
unethical is underlined by research from Latané and Darley (1970), who describe the (mental) steps a whistleblower will take before taking action. The steps they identified are as follows: The observer must…
1. Be aware of the wrongdoing;
2. Decide whether it warrants action;
3. Decide if he is responsible for taking such action;
4. Select an appropriate method of action;
5. Undertake action. Latané and Darley (1970)
This thesis is aimed primarily at the first step, the awareness of wrongdoing. If you are not aware that an action is morally wrong, you will not be inclined to undertake any action to correct the perceived wrongdoing.
1.4 The link between ethics and personality
In the previous century Charles Ponzi became one of the biggest swindlers ever. Ponzi turned committing fraud into an art and created his own pyramid-fraud masterpiece. Charles Ponzi emigrated from Italy to the United States with an empty purse and a pocketful of dreams. Ponzi had always carried dreams of a wealthy and happy future and after falling in love he tried his best to make his wife happy. Being both clever and smooth-talking, Ponzi found an obscure way to make money, fast. Ponzi promised investors high return-rates, collected their investments and paid the promised returns with money from new investors. But while he promised rainbows and endless wealth to his investors, in reality he did not invest any money in anything other than his exorbitant lifestyle. Eventually his pyramid collapsed like a card house and hundreds of investors were left empty handed. (Walsh, 1998) Now, as it appears, Charles Ponzi had all the personality traits that made him the perfect swindler. Charming, witty and quick on his feet, Ponzi had exactly the right kind of personality to become one of the world’s biggest charlatans. Ponzi acted as unethically as one might image and did so without any apparent remorse. Is there any way his victims could have known this immoral behavior beforehand?
Do we have clues to predict whether a person is inclined to behave immorally?
The misappropriation of assets, illegal gratuity, embezzlement, off-book transactions or financial statement fraud, the list is endless. Even the most loyal employee can act immoral when the opportunity arises and the motive is there. When facing a lack of segregated duties, employees might be tempted to take advantage of the insufficient internal control.
HIstory has taught us that individuals might respond differently to the same situation. An employee who gets confronted with the possibility to abuse his access and authority to enrich himself might or might as well not commit fraud. Just as students might vary in their opinion on cheating on a test. Is a student’s view on an ethical dilemma affected by his or her personality traits? And if so, how does one’s personality influence the respond to an ethical dilemma? Personality might play and evident role in the actions a person is prone to take. With my research I am trying to uncover if there is a distinct correlation between the personality traits of a student and the stand he or she is inclined to take when faced with an ethical dilemma.
14
1.5 Statement of the problem
It is important to obtain information about a student’s ability to recognize and rate unethical behavior. As controllers and auditors are expected to behave ethically it is very important to teach students how to behave in a morally accepted manner as a part of their professional education. Currently there is little information about the ethical views of
accountancy and controlling students of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. There has not yet been a research that extensively examines the differences in ethical views between bachelor, master and post-master students. This research is developed to obtain information about the different ethical views, and how these views correlate with demographical factors like age, gender and level of education and personality traits.
1.6 Purpose of the study
This study tries to contribute to the knowledge there is about ethical views. Students from the Rijksuniversiteit
Groningen, from the faculty of Economics and Business, were asked to fill out a survey to test their ability to recognize an rate unethical behavior. This ability will be measured along with their personality traits and their gender, age, degree of education, work experience and educational specialization. To measure if a student’s personality traits play a significant role in the process of detecting unethical behavior this correlation will also be measured.
1.7 Research question
Is there a significant relationship between a student’s ability to detect and rate ethical dilemmas and the characteristics of a student, being; gender, age, level of education, choice of educational specialization and years of work experience and personality traits?
1.8 Key definitions
Accounting, Accountancy, Agreeableness, Auditing, Big Five Inventory, Big Five Personality, Conscientiousness, Controlling, Ethics, Extraversion, Kohlberg, Morality, Neuroticism, Openness to experience, Personality.
15
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 An introduction to moral philosophy
The giving of laws is a grand deed, still, even where a city is well-equipped, if the magistrates established to look after the well-formulated laws were unfit,
then not only would the laws no longer be well founded, and the situation most ridiculous,
but those very laws would be likely to bring greatest the harm and ruin to cities.
(Plato (1980), The Laws, 751 b-c)
This chapter starts with a quote from the philosopher Plato, extracted from his work The Laws, dating back to 751 before the birth of Christ. The quote refers to the fitness of the magistrates equipped with the task of looking after the laws. Plato is trying to tell us that a law is useless, and even counter-productive, if the people responsible for looking after it are unfit to properly fulfill their task. Together with his book ‘The Republic’ Plato’s book ‘The Laws’ represents Plato’s view on the ethics of government and law. Since ethical dilemmas are being solved by internal feelings of morality and justice, an understanding of the most important moral philosophies is necessary for this thesis.
Moral philosophy tries to shape a framework for deciding what is wrong or right based on rules and principles designed by people. These rules and principles enable the judgment of the morality of an action. Our modern day society and justice system is built upon these frameworks. Moral philosophy provides us with guidelines for resolving conflicts and gives us tools to optimize the safety and happiness of people living in groups. (Ferrell, Freadrich, and Ferrell, 2011, p.
173) It provides an insight in the internal reasoning of people faced with ethical dilemmas.
2.1.1 Just and unjust
Laws are closely intertwined with moral behavior, as laws are designed to encourage and outline moral behavior. Laws define unethical and unwanted citizen behavior and give shape to morally accepted behavior. Laws are the foundations of our society, they represent justice. As J. Rawls (1999) cites in his book ‘A Theory of Justice’: “Justice denies that the loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. It does not allow that the sacrifices imposed on a few are outweighed by the larger sum of advantages enjoyed by many. Therefore in a society the liberties of equal citizenship are taken as settled; the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests.” (Rawls, 1999, p.3) From this quotation we can extract that even if the greater good is served by an unjust action, it does not make the action itself justifiable. Professor Sandel of the university of Harvard explains this in his lecture ‘Justice, what is the right thing to do’3 by using the Coliseum as an example. Professor Sandel illustrates that the battles in the Roman Coliseum where, in front of the prying eyes of the Roman people, slaves were sacrificed in bloody battles for the Romans entertainments’ sake are an example of a situation where the greater good does not justify immorality. Even though the greater good concerns hundreds of Romans having a good time, watching a poor slave meeting his dismal fate, this does not justify the action.
3http://www.justiceharvard.org/, consulted on the 18th of June
16 However, there are examples of unjust actions that are just when regarding the greater good. When someone is
panicking because he is almost drowning it is hard to save him. Knocking the victim unconscious to safe him by carrying him up shore is then necessary. Knocking someone unconscious is an unjust action but is in this case justified because it is done to save the victim from drowning. Rawls (1999) writes about this in his book: “Injustice is tolerable only when it is necessary to avoid an even greater injustice. Being first virtues of human activities, truth and justice are uncompromising.”
2.1.2 Virtue ethics
In his book ‘The Republic’ Plato describes how individuals should behave. He debates the definition of morally accepted behavior. Together with his pupil Aristotle, Plato provided a framework for assessing ‘good behavior’.
(Carden, 2006) Plato states that humans have both rational and non-rational desires, called appetites. These appetites can either be necessary, unnecessary or immoral. (MacIntyre, 1998) An example of a rational desire is the desire to eat when your body is in need of food, a nonrational desire is the desire to overeat after your body is satiated. (Santas, 2010) Plato reasons that virtues exist to still and manage one’s appetites (Devettere, 2002). This view has been refined by Aristotle, who considered virtues to be examples of moderation and therefore the ‘golden midpath’ of human behavior. Some examples of virtues as described by Aristotle are: courage (neither cowardly nor reckless), temperance (neither gluttony nor prudishness) and justice (neither too much nor too little). (Frederick, 1999, p. 31). Devettere states in his work, ‘Introduction to virtue ethics: Insights of the Ancient Greeks’: “For Plato, ethics is more than rational; we need knowledge, but we also need to shape and form our nonrational desires by training, education, and the
development of good habits, dispositions, and attitudes – what we today call moral character – because knowledge by itself is not enough to guide our non-rational desires.” (Devettere, 2002, p.16) In accordance with Plato’s theory about rational and non-rational desires Aristotle reasons that the “task of ethics is to shape and manage nonrational desires as well as to eradicate ignorance and false beliefs.” (Devettere, 2002, p.20).
Aristotle reasoned that an object or person functions well or is considered dysfunctional depending on the extent to which it is meeting its purpose or initial intention. Aristotle reasons that the proper goal for all humans is to function well, the moral character of a person enables achieving the demanded goal or behavior. (Devettere, 2002, p.21). If the purpose of a scissor is to cut paper and it does so perfectly, it is considered to be a good machine. Now how does this theory apply to accountants? In their book ‘Accounting Ethics’ (2nd Edition, 2001), Duska, Duska, and Ragatz apply this theory of virtue ethics to accounting practices and accountants. They underline that a good accountant is an accountant who acts according to the intentional purpose of an accountant. In the style of Aristotle they emphasize that accountants should be: “Truthful in all their professional dealings. They should benefit others. They should avoid harming or exploiting others. They should live up to their responsibilities because they have committed to them. Accountants should behave with integrity.” (Duska, Duska, Ragatz, 2001, p.67) According to Ferrell, Freadrich and Ferrell virtue ethics states that the moral decision in any given situation is based on the action that a person with a ‘good’ moral character would do. According to virtue ethics, the end does not justify the means in any given situation. (Ferrell, Fraedrich, Ferrell, 2011, p. 174)
2.1.3 Consequentialism
Another view of ethical behavior is consequentialism. Consequentialism is a normative ethical theory. (Peterson, 2013) Normative ethics state that the question whether an action is required, permitted, or forbidden is a function of several different morally relevant factors. By articulating these normative factors, and discovering how they interact, the
17 morality of an act can be determined. (Kagan, 1998, p. 17) I will underline this point of view with an example: let’s say I go over to my grandmother’s house. I have no key, but I know she is home to unlock the door. When I arrive I see my grandmother on the floor holding her upper leg and looking as if she is in terrible pain and is unable to move herself. I realize that she is in need of help, but since I have no key I have no way to reach her but too smash the window and enter through there. I decide to do so and help grandma by taking care of her and calling an ambulance. In this case I broke the window, which can be considered a felony. But according to normative ethics this action has to be viewed in the light of surrounding events, the normative factors, in this case grandma being in desperate need of (medical) help.
Consequentialism is an approach to ethics that reasons that the morality of action is solely dependent of its outcome or consequences. A more commonly known approach of this is the reasoning: ‘The ends justify the means’. This is a quite one-dimensional point of view. It reasons that the morality of an act is based on a single aspect such as the “sum total of wellbeing produced by the act, or the sum total of priority- or equality-adjusted wellbeing.” (Peterson, 2013, p. vii preface) Multi-dimensional consequentialism takes a more refined point of view. Multi-dimensional consequentialism argues that: “Act that, for example, lead to someone being better off at the expense of another, or which produce unfair inequalities, or which are risky, could be right to some degree but not entirely right, no matter how well these acts score with respect to other aspects.” (Peterson, 2013, p. vii preface)
Consequentialism can be divided into different moral philosophies. Consequentialists consider acts to be morally acceptable or right if they produce some desired result, such as the realization of self-interest or utility. (Ferrell, Freadrich, and Ferrell, 2011, p. 173) Egoism defines the terms of right and wrong from a point that only focuses on the consequences for the individual, thereby ignoring consequences to others or society. Egoism is merely focused on self- interest and personal gain. Utilitarianism is, contrary to egoism, not focused on maximizing one’s personal benefits, but intentioned to maximize total utility. Utilitarianism is looking for the ‘greatest good for the greatest number of people’.
Deontological philosophies are regarded as non-consequentialist moral philosophies.
2.1.4 Egoism
Egoism is the view that people are inclined to act and behave in a way that serves their own best interest. This means they value actions as morally acceptable when the contribution to themselves is maximized. (Pojman, Fieser, 2011) In the light of Enron and other fraudulent scandals terminology like egoism could leave a bitter taste in one’s mouth.
However, there is a distinct line between acting for your own self-interest and acting selfish. (Sullivan, 2007) As Sullivan states in his book: “At a first glance, it would seem that ethical egoism, or self-interest, is selfish. However, there is a contrast to be drawn between self-interest and selfishness. Self-interest is not always bad. In fact, many self- interested pursuits are good and even necessary.” (Sullivan, 2007, p. 22) Not all self-interested behavior is necessary immoral. When I decide to walk on the pavement for my own safety, this is an act out of pure self-interest. However, by doing so, I am not harming anyone around me. Problems occur, when self-interest conflicts with the rights of others.
When one decides to pursue his own self-interest at the expense of others, it is regarded as selfish, unethical and immoral. (Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011)
Egoism can be used as a tool to make people act in a way we want them to act. In his work ‘The Theory of Moral Sentiments’ eighteenth-century economist Adam Smith (1759) defends egoism for it brings economic benefits to society. Smith argues in his work that egoism promotes a market-driven society where individuals try to keep ‘alive’ by producing better products and selling them at a lower price than others. (Pojman, Fieser, 2011) Over the past several
18 years, however, accountants have noticed the downside of this argument. In fear of losing the client accountants have started to perform audits at lower prices and self-interest has led to scandals like Enron. On the bright side, Smith also provides an incentive for accountant to behave ethically. Smith notes that a person strives for social approval and recognition by society and others. Smith notes people have a desire “to be observed, to be attended to, to be taken notice of with sympathy complacency an approbation” (Smith, 1759/1976, p.50). By appealing to this nature self-interested can be used as a tool to guide people in the direction we want them to behave. ‘Naming & shaming’ or another type of negative reaction from society might be sufficient to deter a person from acting immorally. Punishments for crimes are important tools for shaping a person’s behavior. In accounting codes of conduct are designed to provide accountants with guidelines on moral behavior. Combined with formal behavioral restrictions and punishment for crossing codes of conduct all these instruments appeal to one’s self-interest for acting morally.
2.1.5 Utilitarianism
Another moral philosophy that is consequentialism-based is utilitarianism. According to this theory people tend to favor ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. Duska, Duska and Ragatz refer to this problem in their book:
“Utilitarianism is in greater accord with our moral sensibilities than egoism is, and it reflects what we do when we find reasons to justify an action or practice. Doing something to make yourself happy is acceptable unless doing so makes someone else miserable. If you do something that maximizes your own happiness, makes others happy, and leaves precious few people miserable, the action is justified. … (An action is) unethical when it harms more people then it helps.” (Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011, p. 57) This however gives us a formula with two variables; ‘good’ and
‘number’. The question arises: which variable should be preferred over the other? (Pojman, Fieser, 2011)
Utalitarianism has it problems. The first dilemma lays in the terminology ‘greatest good’. In their book Duska, Duska and Ragatz provide the example of the distribution problem, explained by an example with five persons and five pickles. (Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011, p. 58) Based on the terminology ‘for the greatest number of people’ all five pickles should be equally distributed amongst the five persons. But what if two people love pickles and two others couldn’t care less about pickles? You are not making the them any happier by distributing the pickles equally.
Utilitarianism leaves society with the question on how to distribute goods in a fair way. Another difficulty arises in the terminology ‘the greatest number of people’. In his lecture of ‘Justice, what is the right thing to do’ professor Sandel of the University of Harvard introduces a case, designed by Judith Jarvis Thomson. (Jarvis Thomson, The Trolley Problem, 1985) In this case five people are in the hospital, each in desperate need of a different organ for their survival. In walks a traveler for a routine checkup, who carries all the vital organs needed to save the other five. The doctor could make the traveler disappear without anyone suspecting him. By doing so, he could provide the other five people with the organ they need. In that case, is it allowed to kill that person in order to save the lives of the five other people? Does the greatest number overthrow the individual rights of the sixth person? The utilitarian approach might imply that this is the case. By using the organs five people survive while one person dies. However, that would make one person responsible for a death whereas in the case of the five people dying, no one would have been responsible. (Barcalow, 2007)
This problem has been described as the ‘problem of illicit means’. For most people the ends do not justify the means, but from a utilitarian perspective it is precisely that the ends justify the means, even if the means are immoral. (Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011, p. 60) This implies that immoral actions are justified, as long as they contribute to the greater good. Utilitarians who justify immoral actions by referring to the good consequences are accused of missing a vital point of ethics: the fact that some actions are principally wrong, irrespective of the consequences. (Duska, 2007, p. 28).
19 2.1.6 Deontology
Contrary to the utilitarian point of view that the end justifies the means, stands the deontological point of view. The name deontology is abstracted from the Greek word of ‘Deontos’, which is translated as ‘what must be done’,
‘obligation’ or ‘duty’. Deontology states that actions should not be viewed in the light of the consequences, but rather in spite of the consequences. (Duska, 2007) Deontology is based on the Kantian approach to ethics, as defined by
Immanuel Kant. Born in East Prussia in 1724 Kant’s ideas are still of great importance in modern day society. Kant wrote that “the highest good is good will, to act from a good will is to act from duty”. Kant reasons that the intention of an action defines if the action is morally right or wrong, despite the consequences. (Frederick, 1999) If an accountant is acting in accordance with the code of conduct, just because he doesn’t want to get fired if he gets caught acting immoral, his actions are not genuinely moral. Instead if he acts in accordance with the code of conduct because he feels it is his obligation and duty as an accountant to live up to the moral standards society demands of accountant he is considered being of good will by deontologists. Kant wrote different statements on moral behavior, the most important ones will be discussed here.
Kant describes a difference between two different types of duties. The first are called the hypothetical imperatives.
These are duties you commit yourself too because you desire a certain outcome, like the writer of this thesis who wants to obtain a master’s degree. These implications are dependent on personal desires and wishes The other duties are a necessity for every person, without any possible exceptions, at any given time. These mandatory duties are called categorical imperatives. (Frederick, 1999) If you want to fulfill your personal duties, like obtaining a degree in economics, you have to study, devote time and sacrifice nights in the local pub with beer and friends. But what about the categorical imperative? This never-ending duty can be regarded as the moral obligation that one should not inflict on others what he does not wish on himself. Kant reasons that a person should always threat others as he would like them to treat him, even when he resents doing so because others have not treated him with the same respect. (Clark Power, 2007)
Kant reasons that a person should always be treated with respect. Kant refines this by stating: “Act so as never to treat another rational being merely as a means.” Kant states that no other human being should be treated as a mere
instrument or tool for the benefit of others. This statement provides an answer to the utilitarian problem of illicit means.
(Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011, p. 65) Let’s go back to the transplant case as mentioned earlier. If I apply the Kantian ethical theory to this case I can argue that using the organs of a traveler for the sake of saving five other persons is morally unacceptable. Kant states the following: “Act so that you can will the maxim of your action to become a universal law.” The maxim of a person is the reasoning behind the actions of a person. Kant means that your behavior is acceptable if it would still be acceptable if everybody acted with the same reasoning (Clark Power, 2007) Let’s apply this theory to one of the vignettes that is used in the research: “The owner of a local small business, which is currently in financial difficulty, approaches a longtime friend to borrow and copy a proprietary database software package which will be of great help in generating future business. The software package retails for $500.” (Cohen, J.R., Post, L.W., Sharp, D.J., 20014) Let’s say the friend decides to provide his friend with a copy of the necessary software. The maxim of his action becomes: If a friend is in need it is acceptable to provide him with an illegal copy of software. If this maxim became a universal law people all over the world would be excused from buying software when they needed it
4An Examination of Differences in Ethical Decision-making between Canadian Business Students and Accounting Professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 30, 319-336.
20 drastically. Software prices would rise, companies would experience a decrease in income which might lead to
dismissals and so on. (Clark Power, 2007) At this point Kant is actually judging an action by its consequences, so his theory does find an overlap with consequentialism. (Duska, Duska & Ragatz, 2011)
2.2 Descriptive ethics
2.2.1 An introduction to descriptive ethics
Descriptive ethics focuses on the study of people’s ethical ideas, beliefs and the ways society regards behavior as morally (un)acceptable. Descriptive ethics is concerned with the ethical as an empirical fact. (Rich, 2006, p.17) Its goal is to describe, characterize and study the morality of people, organizations and such. It is primed at discovering the origin and reasoning behind behavior. It tries to shed a light on the perceptions and understandings of human behavior that lead to the ethical standards in our society. It examines how people in societies act and how their society values and punishes or rewards their (im)moral behavior. (Caroll, Bucholtz, 2009) In the previous paragraphs I focused on moral philosophies and morally accepted behavior. I discussed how important philosophers like Aristotle and Kant reasoned people should behave. Descriptive ethics, however, does not focus on how people should behave, but how they are behaving. In the following paragraphs I will discuss the researches concerning descriptive ethics that have served as a foundation for my research.
2.2.2 Kohlberg
In the previous century psychologist Jean Piaget performed a lot of important research on the field of moral behavior.
He examined children who were playing a game of marbles5. By observing and analyzing the behavior of the playing children he observed the developmental process of the child and the forming of the internal morality of the child. On the basis of his findings Piaget created a structured framework for the developing of the conscientiousness of rules and moral judgment in children, teens, adolescents and young adults. Piaget referred to his own framework as a representation of the “stages in conceptuality”. Piaget stated: “An individual’s moral fiber develops through social intercourse in a series of stages over the life cycle and is particularly vulnerable during adolescence and young adulthood” (Piaget, 1932). This relates to Lawrence Kohlberg in a way that Kohlberg researched and refined the findings and theories of Piaget. For his research Kohlberg followed 58 male teens for a period of 12 years into their adolescence and early adulthood. Kohlberg found that the decision-making process became increasingly complex with age. He found that the human moral reasoning behind a decision can be divided into six stages. “The profile of an individual represents a dominant stage the person is leaving and a stage he is moving into. The characteristics of the levels and stages define the construct
moral judgment” (Kohlberg, 1969).
Stages of moral development
Kohlberg’s stages of moral development offer an extensive base for a study of the moral development and reasoning of a person. Kohlberg (1969, 1977) identifies the following stages and levels:
Level One – Pre-Conventional Level
At this level (the person) is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but interprets these labels in terms of the physical or the hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward, exchange of favors) or in
5 Translated to Dutch marbles are ‘knikkers’
21 terms of the physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. The level is divided into two stages. In stage 1 the person is sticking to the rules to avoid physical punishment; the person obeys the rules solely for his own sake. The physical consequences of actions determine the chosen behavior, regardless of the human meaning or value of these consequences. Avoidance of punishment and unquestioning deference to power are valued in their own right, not in terms of respect for an underlying moral order (the latter being Stage 4). In stage 2 the person is following the rules solely when it is in one’s immediate interest. Right is an equal exchange, a fair deal. Human relations are viewed in terms like those of the marketplace. Elements of fairness, of reciprocity, and of equal sharing are present, but they are always interpreted in a physical, pragmatic way. It’s a matter of “You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours,” not of loyalty, gratitude or justice.
Level Two – Conventional Level
At this level, maintaining the expectations of the individual’s family, group, or nation is perceived as valuable in its own right, regardless of the immediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only of conformity to personal
expectations and social order, but of the loyalty to it, of actively maintaining, supporting and justifying the order, and of indentifying with the group involved in it. The level is divided into stage 3 and 4. A person in stage 3 feels that ‘Good’
behavior is that which pleases or helps others and is approved by them. One earns approval by being ‘nice’. There is much conformity to stereotypical images of what is majority or ‘natural’ behavior. Behavior is frequently judged by intention – “he means well” becomes important for the first time. In stage 4 a person is fulfilling duties and obligations to which he has agreed. The person is upholding laws except for the extreme cases in which the laws conflict with fixed social duties. The behavior considered ‘right’ consists of doing one’s duty and maintaining the given social order for his own sake.
Level Three – Post-Conventional Level
At this level there is a clear effort to define moral values and principles that have validity and application apart from the authority of the groups or persons holding these principles and apart from the individuals own identification with these groups. This level also has two stages, being stage 5 & 6. At stage 5 the person is being aware that people hold a variety of values and that rules are relative to the group. The person is upholding rules because he considers them a social contract. ‘Right’ actions are considered to be defined in terms of general individual rights and standards which have been critically examined and agreed upon by (the whole) society. There is an emphasis upon the possibility of changing law in terms of considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in terms of ‘Law-and-Order’ as in Stage 4). A person in stage 6 defines ‘right’ by the decision of conscience in accord with self-chosen ethical principles appealing to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. The principles are abstract and ethical and not concrete morals ’written in stone’. At heart, these are the universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity and equality of human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons.
2.2.3 Rest
The theory of Kohlberg is based on acquiring information about a person’s moral level by conducting an interview with open-ended questions and interpreting and scoring the answers. The positive side of these open-ended measures is that the social desirability of the answers is not considered a problem. However, the test developed by Kohlberg is considered time consuming, and the nature of his test made that researchers needed substantial training to conduct the interviews and score the results. (Klebe Trevino, 1992) In 1979 James Rest fabricated the different issues test (referred to as ‘DIT’).
22 Contrary to the original test by Kohlberg, which required the person to answer open-ended questions, the DIT is based on multiple-choice answers. The test contains six hypothetical moral dilemmas, each provided with a list of answers to the dilemma. The person ranks out of these answers the four he relates to most, which then form the P-score of the person. The test does not rank the person in a stage a defined by Kohlberg, but it does provide insight on the degree to which a person is principled. The test can divide people into categories like ‘low-principled’ or ‘highly-principled’. Also the test has incorporated a check for people answering solely as they think is socially desirable. The check consists of a computed M-score, which indicated to what extend a person is choosing answers that sound rather fancy but are actually rather meaningless. A person with an M-score of 8 will be eliminated from further analyses (Rest, 1979). Since the development of the test, researches noted that it was the most widely used assessment for studying moral judgment.
(Klebe Trevino, 1992). Rest suggested that in every person there are four component processes which, when all activated, result in morally accepted behavior. It is important to note that Rest (1986) explicitly mentioned that these internal processes have an interactive nature and influence each other. If one of the processes is lacking, the much desired morally correct behavior will not follow. The four processes as defined by Rest (1986) and by Rest, Narvaez, Bebeau, & Thoma (1999) are: Moral sentivity, moral judgment, moral motivation and moral character.
Thorne added extra factors to the model of James Rest. Thorne observed that the first two components of Rest’s model are primarily intellectual in nature, while the last two components are intimately connected with virtue. (Armstrong, Ketz, Owsen, 2003) Integrating the four-component model developed by rest with the virtue ethics theory leads to the following model. (Thorne, 1998, p. 298).
Fi g ur e 1 Mo de l a s de ve l o pe d by T ho r ne
The model highlights the importance of taking multiple factors of a person into account when trying to produce a vivid image of one’s tendency to act in a morally accepted manner. Thorne highlights the importance of the personal virtues
‘ethical motivation’ and ‘ethical character’; these factors are influenced by a person’s personal traits
23
2.3 An introduction to personality trait theory
An important theory for psychologists is trait theory. This theory states that personality traits affect the way people are inclined to act and behave. By analyzing a person’s personality traits is it possible to explain the way a person responds to a situation and even predict future behavior. The traits they possess can be related to a behavioral pattern.
Researchers believe that personality stabilizes in adulthood and does not change substantially after a person has reached it 20’s, thereby leading to a consistent pattern of behavior. People scoring high in conscientiousness are expected to perform well on a variety of jobs due to their disciplined and organized character. (Hohn, Robinson, Purvin, 2010) 2.3.1 Five factor theory of personality
In the previous century researchers tried to unveil the basic traits in human personality that direct and define our behavior. Researchers Allport and Odbert (1936) scanned the English-language dictionaries and found that at least 18,000 terminologies existed for traits in the English language. All these words were used to describe a person’s personality. Out of these 18,000 trait terms around 4,500 terms reflected relatively stable personality traits. (McAdams, 1990) By grouping similar traits and eliminating unusual and metaphorical traits, Cattell narrowed the 4,500 terms down to 171 traits. (Cattell, 1965) Catell then asked people to rate others on these 171 traits. Based on the correlations amongst the ratings Catell used factor analysis to unveil 16 basic traits. Factor analysis of the same and similar data has consistently produced five general, underlying factors. (McAdams, 1990) These traits have been called the Big Five.
(Goldberg, 1981) The traits display a spectrum of behavioral characteristics. People can score very diverse on this spectrum. The score of a person on a trait distinguishes his behavioral preferences in any given situation. These main traits are labeled as:
- Neuroticism/Emotionally stable;
- Extraversion/Introversion;
- Agreeableness/Antagonism;
- Openness to experience;
- Conscientiousness/Undirectedness. (McAdams, 1990, p.207) 2.3.2 Neuroticism
Eysenck was a researcher, who worked in clinical psychology in English hospitals during the Second World War.
During his treatment of soldiers he proposed a theory involving two major dimensions of personality, Neuroticism and Extraversion. (Eysenck, 1947) Eysenck noticed that some people are much more prone to stress than others, who seemed more emotional stable. The people who are more sensitive to stress experience more fear and anxiety then people who are less sensitive to stress. Eysenck described these two opposites as neuroticism versus emotional stability.
During his work Eysenck noted that very neurotic people felt a great deal of worry and nervousness in response to stressful situations whereas emotional stable people hardly encountered any negative emotions in reaction to stressful situations. (Ashton, 2013, p. 110) People scoring very high on the dimension neuroticism are more often worrisome, depressed, emotional, nervous, moody, hostile, vulnerable and self-conscious. They feel more insecure and hold a low opinion of themselves. People who score low on neuroticism are often regarded as calm, relaxed, hardy, secure, self- satisfied and rather unemotional. (McAdams, 1990, p. 218) Research has shown that people scoring high on neuroticism find it difficult to adjust their social behavior to meet situational demands. They appear to be oblivious to social cues, perhaps too self-preoccupied to notice what environment are saying about them. (McAdams, 1990, p. 221)
24 2.3.3 Extraversion
Eysenck observed that some people prefer to receive a lot of external stimuli, whilst others felt more uncomfortable with a lot of stimulation of their senses. Some people tend to avoid situations with a lot of interactions and stimuli, while others actively and constantly seek stimulations. Eysenck described this as the difference between extraversion and introversion. People who score (very) high on the trait extraversion usually are outgoing, impulsive and warm.
They have a tendency to seek sensations and interactions. Their energy is directed outward to their external environment. They tend to have many social contacts and frequently take part in social activities. They tend to act impulsive and are looking for excitement. (Ashton, 2013) They are usually considered to be assertive, confident and lively people. They are more impulsive, quicker inclined to take risks or seek excitement and participate more often in gambling. Introverts on the other hand tend to be (more) quiet and reflective and are comfortable by themselves. They are less prone to talk to new people and engage less in eye contact when interacting with another person. They prefer more solitary jobs and share many interests with mathematicians, research scientists, engineers and artists. Extroverts, on the other hand, are more drawn to jobs that require a lot of social interaction, like teaching or nursing. (McAdams, 1990, p. 212)
2.3.4 Agreeableness
Agreeableness is, next to extraversion, the other interpersonal dimension. A person scoring high on agreeableness is considered to be helpful, friendly, caring, altruistic, accommodating, trusting and easy-going. They are very capable of keeping social relationships and get along well with other people. They are inclined to put other people’s needs above their own and show a great concern for other people and humanity as a whole. This makes them modest. They are considered to be forgiving, gentle and flexible. On the other end of the spectrum are the people who are regarded as disagreeable. People scoring very low on agreeableness this threat are viewed as uncooperative, unfriendly, unconcerned, distrusting of others and aggressive. How people score on agreeableness could determine how they interact with other people. A person who scores very high on agreeableness is likely to continue cooperating with others, even when it is likely that he or she is being exploited. Such a person could face the negative consequences of being exploited by others. It is argued that people scoring high on agreeableness are usually more cooperative than exploitative themselves. A person scoring low on agreeableness is less inclined to cooperate with others. (Ashton, 2013) 2.3.5 Openness to experience
In the 1980’s McCrae and Costa defined this dimension. This trait is originally described as ‘culture’. The aspect of culture was seen as a combination of multiple traits showing ability to reflect, imagination, artistry and refinement. A high score on culture indicated that the person was considered intellectual well-rounded, broad and insightful; low scores were narrow, unimaginative, and even crude and boorish. (McAdams, 1990, p. 222) McCrae and Costa reconceptualized culture as the trait ‘openness to experience’. (Costa & McCrae, 1991) People who score high on openness to experience are described as creative, complex, daring, independent, analytical, artistic, liberal and have multilateral and versatile interests. They are open to new ideas, values and the feelings of others. They like trying new thing and appreciate arts. Their curiosity, unconventional manners and thinking and imagination sets them apart from people who score low on openness to experience. (McAdams, 1990, p. 222) People scoring low on openness to experience are conservative, down-to-earth, conforming, uninterested in arts, conventional, traditional, non-analytical, simple and narrowly interested. They tend to hold rather rigid and traditional views of authority and society. They follow the rules and norms because they carry the strong-held belief that rules are designed to obey. People scoring high
