The rationalizing animal: moral disengagement and ethical decision making

Purpose Research in behavioral ethics has focused on factors allowing individuals to act unethically without feeling distress. Moral disengagement refers to the process by which we persuade ourselves that ethical standards do not apply in a particular situation. It consists of eight interrelated self-serving biases. This paper aims to examine the implications of moral disengagement for ethical decision-making in organizational contexts. Design/methodology/approach Two experimental studies evaluated whether the influence of moral disengagement is amenable to change. In Study 1 (N = 55), a direct approach was used, in which individuals were trained to recognize moral disengagement openings in everyday ethical scenarios. Study 2 (N = 501) explored an indirect, low-pressure approach that primed an individualist or collectivist mindset. Study 3 (N = 462) involved a survey to test a theoretical framework examining the influence of situational factors and individual differences on ethical decision-making. Findings In Study 1, despite practicing identifying moral disengagement “windows” in real-life scenarios, self-assessed vulnerability to moral disengagement remained unaffected. In Study 2, inducing an individualist mindset fostered a greater reduction in moral disengagement than a collectivist mindset (particularly amongst female participants), but the change in moral disengagement was insignificant. The results of Study 3 highlight the potential to foster ethical culture change in organizations by focusing on the environmental factors that shape our behavior in different contexts. Practical implications Interventions to mitigate self-serving biases that impede accurate evaluations of our actions in an organizational context are considered. Originality/value We are not the rational animals that we would like to think we are. The human brain appears to be prewired for self-justification and for reducing dissonance. Moreover, changing our beliefs about our behavior is difficult, and changing those beliefs for the worse may be impossible. However, by fostering a culture of consideration and respect, organizations can improve the ethicality of decision-making.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Ethics and Systems
Published
2025-12-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoes-03-2025-0121
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Business and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.17
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The rationalizing animal: moral disengagement and ethical decision making

1 citations
International Journal of Ethics and Systems
Ethics in Business and Education
4.17
article

The rationalizing animal: moral disengagement and ethical decision making

article en
1 citations

Abstract

Purpose Research in behavioral ethics has focused on factors allowing individuals to act unethically without feeling distress. Moral disengagement refers to the process by which we persuade ourselves that ethical standards do not apply in a particular situation. It consists of eight interrelated self-serving biases. This paper aims to examine the implications of moral disengagement for ethical decision-making in organizational contexts. Design/methodology/approach Two experimental studies evaluated whether the influence of moral disengagement is amenable to change. In Study 1 (N = 55), a direct approach was used, in which individuals were trained to recognize moral disengagement openings in everyday ethical scenarios. Study 2 (N = 501) explored an indirect, low-pressure approach that primed an individualist or collectivist mindset. Study 3 (N = 462) involved a survey to test a theoretical framework examining the influence of situational factors and individual differences on ethical decision-making. Findings In Study 1, despite practicing identifying moral disengagement “windows” in real-life scenarios, self-assessed vulnerability to moral disengagement remained unaffected. In Study 2, inducing an individualist mindset fostered a greater reduction in moral disengagement than a collectivist mindset (particularly amongst female participants), but the change in moral disengagement was insignificant. The results of Study 3 highlight the potential to foster ethical culture change in organizations by focusing on the environmental factors that shape our behavior in different contexts. Practical implications Interventions to mitigate self-serving biases that impede accurate evaluations of our actions in an organizational context are considered. Originality/value We are not the rational animals that we would like to think we are. The human brain appears to be prewired for self-justification and for reducing dissonance. Moreover, changing our beliefs about our behavior is difficult, and changing those beliefs for the worse may be impossible. However, by fostering a culture of consideration and respect, organizations can improve the ethicality of decision-making.

International Journal of Ethics and Systems
York University (CA)
Gender equality, Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Ethics in Business and Education
4.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.