Predicting Ethical Decision Making in Nigeria: The Roles of Others’ Compassion and Social Dominance Orientation
Adedeji J. Ogunleye *
Department of Psychology and Behavioral Studies, Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti, Nigeria.
Damilola A. Osekita
Department of Psychology and Behavioral Studies, Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti, Nigeria.
Olawumi A. Eluyinka
Department of Psychology and Behavioral Studies, Ekiti State University, Ado Ekiti, Nigeria.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Ethical decision making is a fundamental aspect of human life that impact individuals, their professional lives as well as societal well-being. Ethical decision making is a catalyst for success, peaceful co-existence, and over-all development of a nation. It seem to be, however, that such decision makings lack in many speres and societies of the world and that such is the reason for seeming oppression and dehumanization that characterize many societies of the world.
This study investigated the roles of others’ compassion and social dominance orientation in making ethical decisions and the study was carried out among the residents of Ado Ekiti, Ekiti State and Ile Ife, Osun State using a total of 276 participants.
The Social Dominance Orientation Scale by Pratto el. al. [1], as validated by Aichholzer and Lechner [2], the Santa Clara Ethics Scale by Plante (2004), and the Compassion for Others Scale by Pommier (2011) were respectively used to measure Social Dominance Orientation, Ethical Decision making and Compassion for others.
The hypotheses were tested using multiple regression analysis and independent samples’ t-test.
The study showed that compassion for others is significant in predicting ethical decision making [F(6,269)=13.506, p<.05]. The study also found out that people with lower social dominance orientation (X = 32.3669) are significantly highly prone to making ethical decisions than those with high social dominance orientation (X = 31.1215), t = -2.097, df = 274, p <.05. It was also found out that both social dominance orientation and compassion for others significantly jointly predict ethical decision making [F(2,273) =28.561, p < .05]. Findings from the study also revealed that three (3) of the six dimensions of compassion for others i.e kindness (being caring towards others) (β =.24, t= 3.853, p <.05), common humanity (recognizing that all people experience hardship and a sense of connection to those who are suffering) (β =.36, t = 6.259, p <.05), and separation (a cognitive understanding and sense of pity towards others’ sufferings characterized by extreme isolation and distancing) (β =.14, t = 2.314, p <.05) individually predicted ethical decision making among participants while mindfulness (a balanced awareness that neither avoids nor gets lost in others’ pains) (a (β =-.02, t= -03.387, p >.05), indifference (an emotional response that avoids being judgemental) (β =-.07, t = -1.206, p >.05), and disengagement (avoidance of others’ pains rather than being over-identified with it) (β =.03, t = -0.570, p >.05) dimensions did not. It was found out that male participants (X = 32.1215) do not significantly differ in ethical decision making from their female counterparts (X = 31.7414), t = 0.639, df = 274, p >.05.
Findings were therefore discussed in line with existing literature and it was recommended that Nigerians should be cognitively re-oriented for value appreciation. It is strongly believed that teaching Nigerians the importance of a sense of community will bring about positive changes in their inter-relationships with others and cause inhabitants to relate as one, and consequently promote their empathy, sympathy, and genuine concern towards one another.
Keywords: Compassion for others, social dominance orientation, ethical decision making, moral justification
How to Cite
Downloads
References
Pratto F, Cidam A, Stewart AL, Bou Zeineddine F, Aranda M, Aiello A, Chryssochoou K, Cichocka A, Cohrs C, Durrheim K, Eicher V, Foels R, Gorska P, Lee I, Licata L, Li L, Liu J, Morselli D, Meyer I, Muldoon O, Muluk H, Petrovic N, Prati F, Papastamou S, Petrovic I, Prodromitis G, Rubini M, Saab R, vanStekelenburg J, Sweetman J, Zheng W, Henkel KE.. Social dominance in context and in indiviguals: contextual moderation in 15 languages and 20 countries. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2013;4:587-599. DOI:10.1177/1948550612473663.
Aichholzer J, Lechner CM. Refining the short social dominance orientation scale (ssdo): a validation in seven European countries. Journal of Social and Political Psychology. 2021;9(2):475-489. Available:https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.6919
Bandura A. Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Moral Education. 2002; 31:101–119.
Mumford MD, Mecca JT, Watts LL. Planning processes: Relevant cognitive processes influencing performance operations. In MD Mumford, MR Frese (Eds.). The psychology Performance. New York: Taylor and Francis; 2015.
Pan Y, Sparks JR. Predictors, consequence, and measurement of ethical judgments: Review and meta-analysis. Journal of Business Research. 2012;65: 84-91.
Sonenshein S. The role of construction, intuition, and justification in responding to ethical issues at work: The sensemaking-intuition model. Academy of Management Review. 2017;32:1022-1040.
Watts LL, Medeiros KE, Mcintosh TJ, Mulhearn TJ. Decision biases in the context of ethics: Initial scale development and validation. Personality & Individual Differences; 2020. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2019.109609.
Torrence BS, Watts LL, Mulhearn TJ, Turner MR, Todd EM, Mumford MD, Connelly S. Curricular approaches in ethics education: Reflecting on more and less effective practices in instructional content. Accountability in Research. 2017; 24:269-296.
Moudatsou M, Stavropoulou A, Philalithis A, Koukouli S. The role of empathy in health and social care professionals. Healthcare (Basel). 2020;8(1):26. DOI:10.3390/healthcare 8010026.
Du J, Huang S, Lu Q, Ma L, Lai K, Li K. Influence of empathy and professional values on ethical decision-making of emergency nurses: A cross sectional study. International Emergency Nursing. 2022, Jul;63. Available:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ienj2022.101186.
Goleman D. The Brain and Emotional Intelligence: New Insights. New York: Random House Publishing Group; 2011.
Plante TG, McCreadie A. The santa clara ethics scale. Pastoral Psychology; 2019. Available:http://doi.org/10.1007/s 11089-019-00861-w
Colombo RA, Wallace M, Taylor R. An essential service decisions model for applied behavior analytic providers during crisis. Behavior Analysis and Practice. Advance Online Publication; 2020. DOI:10.31234/osf.io/te8ha.
LeBlanc LA, Lazo-Pearson JF, Pollard JS, Unumb LS. The roles of compassion and ethics in decision-making regarding access to applied behavior analysis during the COVID-19 crisis: A response to cox, plavnick and brodhead. Behavior Analysis in Practice. 2020;13(3):604-608. DOI:10.1007/s40617-020-00446-7.
Decety J, Cowell J. The complex relation between morality and empathy. Trends in Cognitive Science. 2014;18(7):337-339. DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.008.
Radey M, Figley CR. The social psychology of compassion. Clinical and Social Work Journal. 2007;35(3):207-214. Available:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-007-0087-3.
Schantz ML. Compassion: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum. 2007;42(2):48-55.
Gerdes KE. Empathy, sympathy, and pity: 21st century definitions and implications for practice and research. Journal of Social Service Research. 2011;37:230-241.
Rosenblatt V. Dominant individuals and unethical decisions: the role of moral disengagement and self control. Academy of Management; 2017, July. Available:https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2012.151.
Dryburgh NSJ. The Relation of Social Dominance Orientation to Moral Decision-Making Using the Process Dissociation Approach. Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis. Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada; 2014. Available:https://ir.lib.uwa.ca/psychd_uht.
Kim Kyoo-Hwa, Guinote Ana. Cheating at the top: Trait dominance explains dishonesty more consistently than social power. Personality and Social Policy Bulletin. 2022;48(12):1651-1666. DOI:10.1177/01461672211051481.
Son Hing LS, Bobocel DR, Zanna MP, McBride MV. Authoritarian dynamics and unethical decision-making: High social dominance orientation leaders and high right-wing authoritanian followers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2007;92(1):67-81. DOI:10:1037/0022-3514.92.1.67.
Ruegger D, King EW. A study of the effect of age and gender upon students’ business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics. 1992; 11:179-186.
Glover SH, Bumpus M, Sharp GF, Munchus G. Gender differences in ethical decision-making. Women in Management Review. 2002;17(5):217-227. DOI:10.1108/09649420210433175.
Schminke M. Gender Differences in ethical frameworks of others’ choices in ethical dillemas. Journal of Business Ethics. 1997; 16(1):55-65.
Radtke R. The effects of gender and settings on accountants’ ethically sensitive decisions. Journal of Business Ethics. 2000;24(4):299-312. DOI:10.1023/A:1006277331803.
Lewin K. Principles of Topological Psychology. New York: McGraw Hill; 1936.
National Bureau of Statistics (NBS). NBS Updates. NBS, Abuja; 2024, January.
Olawuyi Fasilat. Ibadan Residents took to the streets in protest of hard times. Premium Times. 2024, Feb;1.
Plante TG, Plante LG. Graduating with honor: Best practices to promote ethics development in College Students Santa Barbara: Praeger/ABC-CLIO; 2017.