A new article by Inês Ascenso, a PhD student at CEI-Iscte, and Marcelo Moriconi, also a researcher at CEI-Iscte, co-authored with Luís de Sousa, analyses the social and psychological mechanisms that help to explain why people may engage in corrupt practices even though, in principle, they condemn them.
Published in the International Journal of Public Administration, the article ‘“Do as I Say, Not as I Do”: Understanding Moral Rationalisations and Disengagements Behind “Parochial” Corrupt Actions’ focuses on so-called “parochial” corruption in Portugal, practices which, for example, rely on personal connections to circumvent procedures or overcome difficulties in accessing services and resources.
The research is based on an observation: although corruption is widely condemned, certain practices may be tolerated or even adopted in everyday life. To understand this apparent contradiction, the authors analyse the relationship between injunctive norms (what people believe ought to be done) and descriptive norms (what they perceive others to be doing).
Based on survey and focus group data, the results show that, although ‘parochial’ corruption is generally regarded as undesirable, many people feel they have to resort to such practices because they believe that ‘everyone does it’ and consider it an effective way of overcoming the system’s limitations or shortcomings. The study also shows that, depending on the context, certain actions may not even be perceived as corruption. To deal with the conflict between their values and their behaviour, individuals resort to different forms of rationalisation and moral disengagement, which enable them to justify their actions and reduce feelings of guilt.
The findings thus help us to understand how certain practices can be both condemned and tolerated, and how social norms and processes of justification contribute to their persistence.
Read the full article here.