Ethical perceptions: a Spanish adaptation of the PRESOR         questionnaire                F. D. Bretones               ...
BackgroundOrganizations are manage for peoplePerceptions precedes behaviour
Assess ethical perceptionPerceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility  (Singhapakdi et al., 1996)Other (Aupperle, 19...
Factorial structureSinghapakdi et al. (1996):  Social Responsibility and Profitability  Long-term Gains  Short-term GainsE...
Cultural componentCulture explains difference in ethical perceptionDifferent scores in different countriesLack of consiste...
Methodology329 valid surveys collected40.8% men 58.2% womenAverage age: 20 yrs.SPSS © 15.0, PRELIS © 2.12, LISREL © 8.12
QuestionnairesPRESOR (Singhapakdi et al.,1996)Ethic Position Questionnaire (Forysth, 1980)Social Responsible Attitude (Hun...
Ethic Position QuestionnaireDeveloped by Forysth (1980)Realitivism: High rejects universal absolute norms; low implies the...
ReliabilityPRESOR      α: 0.74Ethic Position Questionnaire   α: 0.78Social Responsible Attitude    α: 0.44
Factor 1             Factor 2              Factor 3Factor analysisItem 13Item 1             .67             .64           ...
Factor 1   Factor 2   Factor 3 Confirmatory factor analysisItem 13     .94Item 1      .92Item 12     .84Item 4      .95Ite...
3-dimensional model   The importance of ethics (1,4,8,11,12, 13)   Benefits of social responsibility (6, 7, 15)   Subor...
Fit IndexGFI = 0.99   AGFI = 0.99   NFI = 0.99   NNFI = 1.00   PNFI = .79   PGI = .99>0.50
Validity                         β      R²Importance of ethics            Idealism   .46**    .21          Relativism   -....
Some conclusions   New 3-dimensional structure   Cultural influences   Good instrument to mesure SR perceptions   Stre...
Thank you for your attention        fdiazb@ugr.es
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ethical perceptions

1,273 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,273
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ethical perceptions

  1. 1. Ethical perceptions: a Spanish adaptation of the PRESOR questionnaire F. D. Bretones I. Tamayo J. M. Gonzalez (University of Granada. Spain)2012 EBEN Research Conference. Newcastle, 7-9 June 2012
  2. 2. BackgroundOrganizations are manage for peoplePerceptions precedes behaviour
  3. 3. Assess ethical perceptionPerceived Role of Ethics and Social Responsibility (Singhapakdi et al., 1996)Other (Aupperle, 1984; Maignan, 2000)Most widely used in sereval countries (Vitell, 2004; Park, 2005; Yaman, 2006; Valentine, 2008; Burnaz, 2009; Turker, 2009; Kolodinski, 2010).
  4. 4. Factorial structureSinghapakdi et al. (1996): Social Responsibility and Profitability Long-term Gains Short-term GainsEtheredge (1999): Importance of Ethics and SR Subordination of Ethics and SR
  5. 5. Cultural componentCulture explains difference in ethical perceptionDifferent scores in different countriesLack of consistent across different studiesNot validation studies
  6. 6. Methodology329 valid surveys collected40.8% men 58.2% womenAverage age: 20 yrs.SPSS © 15.0, PRELIS © 2.12, LISREL © 8.12
  7. 7. QuestionnairesPRESOR (Singhapakdi et al.,1996)Ethic Position Questionnaire (Forysth, 1980)Social Responsible Attitude (Hunt et al.,1990)Reverse translated
  8. 8. Ethic Position QuestionnaireDeveloped by Forysth (1980)Realitivism: High rejects universal absolute norms; low implies the acceptation of absolute norms.Idealism: High idealism implies high commitment, while low idealism implies lower commitment, therefore acceptation of harm to others as part of ethical decision.
  9. 9. ReliabilityPRESOR α: 0.74Ethic Position Questionnaire α: 0.78Social Responsible Attitude α: 0.44
  10. 10. Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3Factor analysisItem 13Item 1 .67 .64 .70** .62** -.09 .21 .26 .02Item 12 .61 .64** .09 .20Item 4 .58 .62** .26 .13Item 11 .54 .56** .34 -.16Item 8 .48 .58** -.03 .16Item 7 .16 .73 .77** .22Item 6 .05 .72 .80** .38Item 15 .21 .61 .69** .17Item 2 .18 .19 .71 .61**Item 3 .02 -.01 .69 .75**Item 5 .29 .09 .64 .78**Item 14 .09 .18 .53 .62** Items excluded: 9, 10, 16 **p<0.01
  11. 11. Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Confirmatory factor analysisItem 13 .94Item 1 .92Item 12 .84Item 4 .95Item 11 .83Item 8 .95Item 7 .93Item 6 .84Item 15 .90Item 2 .88Item 3 .91Item 5 .79Item 14 .93
  12. 12. 3-dimensional model The importance of ethics (1,4,8,11,12, 13) Benefits of social responsibility (6, 7, 15) Subordination of social responsibility (2, 3, 5, 14)
  13. 13. Fit IndexGFI = 0.99 AGFI = 0.99 NFI = 0.99 NNFI = 1.00 PNFI = .79 PGI = .99>0.50
  14. 14. Validity β R²Importance of ethics Idealism .46** .21 Relativism -.21** .05Benefits of SR Idealism .26** .26 Relativism .02 .00Subordination of SR Idealism .19** .03 Relativism -.24** .06
  15. 15. Some conclusions New 3-dimensional structure Cultural influences Good instrument to mesure SR perceptions Strenghts with idealism
  16. 16. Thank you for your attention fdiazb@ugr.es

×