Skip to main content
Search
Search
    Quick Search anywhere
    Quick search in Citations
Advanced Search
Skip main navigationClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Previous article
Next article
Research Article – Extended

Integrity and Moral Flexibility

Self-Proclaimed Integrity Relates to Adapting Moral Judgments to Appear Principled

Published Online:June 01, 2023https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000403

Abstract

Abstract: People with high integrity should stubbornly insist on maintaining their moral stances regardless of how their stances will make them appear. However, we examined whether people who claim to be high in integrity will express different moral stances to appear high in integrity. Participants (N = 433) self-reported their integrity and then read and responded to hypothetical moral dilemmas that introduced tension between utilitarian and deontological moral principles. Participants reported their willingness to choose the utilitarian (vs. deontological) option in each dilemma under conditions in which choosing the utilitarian option signaled high integrity (utilitarian-signals-high-integrity condition) or choosing the deontological option signaled high integrity (deontological-signals-high-integrity condition). Generally, participants reported greater willingness to choose the utilitarian (vs. deontological) option in the utilitarian-signals-high-integrity (vs. deontological-signals-high-integrity) condition, but this effect was greater amongst people higher in self-proclaimed integrity. Additional analyses produced similar effects after accounting for participant sex, other moral personality traits, and experimenter demand. Broadly, the findings support the possibility that self-proclaimed integrity may be partly based on a self-presentation process.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage Publications. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Aquino, K., & Reed, A. II (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1423 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Batson, C. D., Thompson, E. R., & Chen, H. (2002). Moral hypocrisy: Addressing some alternatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(2), 330–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.330 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Bock, T., Giebel, H., Hazelbaker, T., & Tufte, L. (2021). Integrating Thomistic virtue ethics with an Eriksonian identity perspective: A new moral identity assessment. Journal of Moral Education, 50(2), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2019.1691511 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Cease, C. K., & Lambert, J. T. (2023). Supplementary materials to “Integrity and moral flexibility: Self-proclaimed integrity relates to adapting moral judgments to appear principled” https://osf.io/dbshc/?view_only=656f67049e2942d3bbd9a012c142ad24 First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Darlington, R. B., & Hayes, A. F. (2017). Regression analysis and linear models. Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., Sundie, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Miller, G. F., & Kenrick, D. T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit strategic costly signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.85 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017346 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hardy, S. A., & Carlo, G. (2005). Identity as a source of moral motivation. Human Development, 48(4), 232–256. https://doi.org/10.1159/000086859 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hart, W., Kinrade, C., Lambert, J. T., Breeden, C. J., & Witt, D. E. (2022). A closer examination of the Integrity Scale’s construct validity. Journal of Personality Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2022.2152346 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hart, W., Tortoriello, G. K., & Kinrade, C. (2021). Conveying one’s agreeableness: Agreeable people alter their moral judgments to convey a moral identity. Personality and Individual Differences, 182, Article 111066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111066 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Hertz, S. G., & Krettenauer, T. (2016). Does moral identity effectively predict moral behavior? A meta-analysis. Review of General Psychology, 20(2), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000062 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Lieberman, M. D., Ochsner, K. N., Gilbert, D. T., & Schacter, D. L. (2001). Do amnesiacs exhibit cognitive dissonance reduction? The role of explicit memory and attitude change. Psychological Science, 12(2), 135–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00323 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • McFerran, B., Aquino, K., & Duffy, M. (2010). How personality and moral identity relate to individuals’ ethical ideology. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20102014 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Miller, M. L., & Schlenker, B. R. (2011). Integrity and identity: Moral identity differences and preferred interpersonal reactions. European Journal of Personality, 25(1), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.765 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Moore, A. B., Clark, B. A., & Kane, M. J. (2008). Who shalt not kill? Individual differences in working memory capacity, executive control, and moral judgment. Psychological Science, 19(6), 549–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02122.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schlenker, B. R. (2008). Integrity and character: Implications of principled and expedient ethical ideologies. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27(10), 1078–1125. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2008.27.10.1078 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Schlenker, B. R. (2012). Self-presentation. In M. R. LearyJ. P. TangneyEds., Handbook of self and identity (pp. 542–570). Guilford Press. First citation in articleGoogle Scholar

  • Schlenker, B. R., Weigold, M. F., & Schlenker, K. A. (2008). What makes a hero? The impact of integrity on admiration and interpersonal judgment. Journal of Personality, 76(2), 323–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2007.00488.x First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar

  • Swann, W. B. Jr. (2012). Self-verification theory. In P. A. M. Van LangeA. W. KruglanskiE. T. HigginsEds., Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 23–42). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n27 First citation in articleCrossref, Google Scholar