"Cheating under pressure: A self-protection model of workplace cheating behavior": Correction to Mitchel et al.
Abstract:
Reports an error in "Cheating Under Pressure: A Self-Protection Model of Workplace Cheating Behavior" by Marie S. Mitchell, Michael D. Baer, Maureen L. Ambrose, Robert Folger and Noel F. Palmer (Journal of Applied Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Aug 14, 2017, np). In the article, the fit statistics in Study 3 were reported in error. The fit of the measurement model is: Χ²(362) = 563.66, p = .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .05; RMSEA = .04. The fit of the SEM model is: Χ²(362) = 563.66, p = .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .05; RMSEA = .04. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2017-34937-001.) Workplace cheating behavior is unethical behavior that seeks to create an unfair advantage and enhance benefits for the actor. Although cheating is clearly unwanted behavior within organizations, organizations may unknowingly increase cheating as a byproduct of their pursuit of high performance. We theorize that as organizations place a strong emphasis on high levels of performance, they may also enhance employees' self-interested motives and need for self-protection. We suggest that demands for high performance may elicit performance pressure-the subjective experience that employees must raise their performance efforts or face significant consequences. Employees' perception of the need to raise performance paired with the potential for negative consequences is threatening and heightens self-protection needs. Driven by self-protection, employees experience anger and heightened self-serving cognitions, which motivate cheating behavior. A multistudy approach was used to test our predictions. Study 1 developed and provided validity evidence for a measure of cheating behavior. Studies 2 and 3 tested our predictions in time-separated field studies. Results from Study 2 demonstrated that anger mediates the effects of performance pressure on cheating behavior. Study 3 replicated the Study 2 findings, and extended them to show that self-serving cognitions also mediate the effects of performance pressure on cheating behavior. Implications of our findings for theory and practice are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record
Insights
High performance demands can increase workplace cheating behavior by creating pressure, anger, and self-serving thoughts. This self-protection model explains how organizations might unintentionally foster unethical conduct when pursuing ambitious goals.
Area of Science:
- Organizational Behavior
- Industrial-Organizational Psychology
- Business Ethics
Background:
- Workplace cheating, defined as unethical behavior to gain unfair advantages, is a significant concern for organizations.
- The pursuit of high performance within organizations may inadvertently create conditions that foster employee cheating.
- This study addresses an error in fit statistics for Study 3 of the original article, providing corrected values.
Purpose of the Study:
- To propose and test a self-protection model explaining how workplace cheating behavior arises from performance pressure.
- To investigate the mediating roles of anger and self-serving cognitions in the relationship between performance pressure and cheating.
- To provide validity evidence for a measure of workplace cheating behavior.
Main Methods:
- A multi-study approach was employed, including the development and validation of a cheating behavior measure (Study 1).
- Two field studies (Studies 2 and 3) utilized time-separated designs to test the proposed theoretical model.
- Statistical analyses, including mediation analyses, were used to examine the relationships between performance pressure, psychological states, and cheating behavior.
Main Results:
- Results from Study 2 indicated that anger mediates the impact of performance pressure on cheating behavior.
- Study 3 replicated Study 2 findings and further demonstrated that self-serving cognitions also mediate this relationship.
- Corrected fit statistics for Study 3's measurement and SEM models are reported: Measurement Model (Χ²(362) = 563.66, p = .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .05; RMSEA = .04) and SEM Model (Χ²(362) = 563.66, p = .001; CFI = .94; SRMR = .05; RMSEA = .04).
Conclusions:
- The findings support the self-protection model, suggesting that performance pressure can lead to cheating through heightened anger and self-serving cognitions.
- Organizations aiming for high performance should be aware of the potential for increased cheating behavior as a byproduct.
- The study offers theoretical insights into the drivers of unethical behavior and practical implications for managing employee conduct in performance-driven environments.
