Gino and Mogilner’s (2014) Hypothesis | Critical Review

Gino and Mogilner’s (2014) Hypothesis | Critical Review Critical Review of Focus Paper: Assessing the credibility of Gino and Mogilner’s (2014) hypothesis and applications Joanna Huang Abstract The focus paper by Gino and Mogilner hypothesises that the reason for previously witnessed relationships between time, money and morality is due to the mediator, self-reflection. Gino and Mogilner (2014) operationalise the construct of morality to measure the subsequent cheating in participants through controlled laboratory experiments. The methodology employed in the paper uses validated and reliable techniques to maintain internal validity (Wicklund and Duval, 1971). In addition, the paper controls and removes possible confounds that may impact the consistency of the results to improve internal reliability. However, the applicability of Gino and Mogilner’s (2014) findings are limited by the controlled laboratory conditions which reduce external validity. Greater applications of this study can be found in alternate research directions regarding the relationship between time, money and morality. Main body The nature of morality and its determinant is a long debated and theorised topic; many experimental investigations in morality attempt to produce supporting evidence for hypothesised relationships between morality and related factors. The focus paper by Gino and Mogilner endeavours to provide empirical evidence that supports the underlying mechanism between time, money and morality is self-reflection. Gino and Mogilner (2014) draw their conceptualisation of morality from the theoretical framework provided by previous studies which have shown a conclusive relationship between time, money and morality. Their methodology operationally defines morality and maintains a standardised procedure to maximise the reliability and validity of their experimental results. Whilst Gino and Mogilner (2014) are able to reliably demonstrate that self-reflection is the underlying mechanism connecting money, time and morality, the immediate applications of the research finding is limited by their approach . The multifaceted definition of morality provides difficulties in measuring the construct within laboratory environments. However, by simplifying moral behaviour to cheating, the seemingly abstract construct has been operationalised by many for experimental research and produced consistent findings, such as Gino and Pierce (2009). In addition, by eliminating the monetary reward (in Study two) and providing anonymity, potential bias from the motivation of money and social desirability of participants to appear competent has been removed. When compared to previous studies by Diener and Wallbom (1976) where anonymity was not provided in the experiment, the recorded cheating could have resulted from two viable motivations; moral ambiguity and possible demonstration of competence (Vallacher and Solodky, 1979). Gino and Mogilner (2014) have shown superiority in operationalising and controlling their experiment to produce empirical evidence that supports their hypothesis. The study follows a standardised procedure to ensure greater generalisability and reliability. Study three uses the mirror technique, a reliable method to encourage self-reflection (Wicklund and Duval, 1971), and improving internal validity by the use of a reliable and consistent technique in the methodology. The mirror technique further validates the robustness of the effect by showing internal consistency between the effects of priming money and time to a validated method. In comparison to the use of environmental stimulus (real cash) by Gino and Pierce (2009), the subtlety of priming money and time constructs benefits external validity by increasing generalisability (Mogilner and Aaker, 2009). Priming the constructs allows greater generalisation to the real world situation by broadening the stimulation of time and money to include mental as well as environmental stimuli. It should be mentioned that the focus paper does have flaws, notably in the use self-reporting scales in Study 4 to measure self-reflection. Self-reporting is limited by the assumption that individuals are insightful and truthful about their own attitudes and behaviours. Additionally, self-reporting may be skewed by the individual desire to appear moral (Nargin and Pogarsky, 2003). Thus, many studies have included social desirability tests to identify to remove possible contenders of lying, such as Nargin and Pogarsky (2003) and Gino and Pierce (2009). Despite lacking such a social desirability test, the questionnaire used to measure self-reflection is similar to the one used by Gino and Pierce (2009), which has proven reliability. Furthermore, Gino and Mogilner (2014) do include a mediation analyses using bootstrap analysis to verify that self-flection was the underlying mechanism between money, time and morality; presenting convincing empirical evidence of the relationship between the constructs. In conceptualising morality as cheating, the study may risk over-simplifying and limiting the construct as cheating may only represent a form of moral judgment rather than morality as a whole (Abend, 2012). Indeed, the experiment essentially limits the concept of morality to the individual moral judgment in response to the given conditions of the study, such as anonymous cheating opportunities. Furthermore, these confined laboratory conditions inhibit the external validity of the study due to the variability of cheating opportunities and occurrence in real life (Gino and Pierce, 2009). However, Gino and Mogilner are not alone in their approach; studies with a similar method include those by Gino and Pierce (2009), and Shu, Gino and Bazerman (2009). These studies adapt their conceptualisation from Jones’ (1991) definition of immorality as behaviour that violates the moral and legal regulations of the wider community; supporting Gino and Mogilner’s operational definition of morality as a standardised method. Whilst using more subtle primes can increase generalisability, as aforementioned, the limitations of applicability are inevitable in laboratory and experimental research. Experimental research is challenged by the difficulty to maintain external validity within the controlled laboratory conditions. Whilst encouraging moral conduct in society is a worthy pursuit, direct application of Gino and Mogilner’s (2014) findings may be difficult and limited by situational and environmental influences of morality. A study by Reed, Aquino and Levy (2007) develops the construct of morality in an alternate approach, suggesting instead that individual concept of morality directly influences attitudes towards money and time. This reverse approach is advantageous in having immediate applications, specifically in marketing; non-profit organisations can manipulate the community for more time or money donations based on the prominence of the respective constructs in their advertisement (Reed et al., 2007). Despite forgoing the mediator role of self-reflection, the research does not contradict Gino and Mogilner. Hence, given that the thought of time can increase ad herence to moral conduct (Gino and Mogilber, 2014), the focus paper may find applications in an indirect way, such as time prominent marketing strategies. The work of Gino and Mogilner (2014) may be limited in the short run for immediate benefits to society; however it will inarguably be a great asset when considering the growing prevalence of immorality. Gino and Mogilner (2014) present reliable empirical evidence to determine that self-reflection is the mediator between time, money and morality. The focus paper appropriately operationalises morality to construct a reliable and valid research that increases the credibility of the results. In demonstrating sound empirical results, Gino and Mogilner have proposed a plausible method to reduce immoral behaviours in society. However, the immediate applications of this method are restricted by difficulties in generalising the experimental research to the external, real world environment, and may have to wait until further research is conducted regarding ethical and effective applications. References Abend, G. (2012). What the Science of Morality Doesnt Say About Morality. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 43(2), 157-200. Diener, E., Wallbom, M. (1976). Effects of Self-Awareness on Antinormative Behaviour. Journal of Research in Personality, 10(1), 107-111. Gino, F., Mogilner, C. (2014). Time, money, and morality. Psychological Science, 25(2), 414-421. Gino, F., Pierce, L. (2009). The abundance effect: Unethical behaviour in the presence of wealth. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 142-155. Jones, T.M. (1991). Ethical Decision Making by Individuals in Organizations: An Issue-Contingent Model, The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-395. Mogilner, C., Aaker, J. (2009). The Time vs. Money Effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2),277-291. Nagin, D.S., Pogarsky, G. (2003). An Experimental Investigation of Deterrence: Cheating, Self-Serving Bias, and Impulsivity. Criminology, 41(2), 167-194. Reed, A., Aquino, K., Levy, E. (2007). Moral Identity and Judgements of Charitable Behaviours. Journal of Marketing 71(1), 178-193. Shu, L.L., Gino, F., Bazerman, M.H. (2011). Dishonest Deed, Clear Conscience: When Cheating Leads to Moral Disengagement and Motivated. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(3), 330-349. Vallacher, R.R., Solodky, M. (1979). Objective Self-Awareness, Standards of Evaluation and Moral Behaviour. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 15(3), 254-262. Wicklund, R.A., Duval, S. (1971). Opinion change and performance facilitation as a result of objective self-awareness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,7(3), 319-342. 1 Nella Larsen Novel: Passing Nella Larsen Novel: Passing Nella Larsens novel Passing was written in 1929 and reflected the reality she experienced herself as for the questions of racial identity and hard integration of African Americans into the civilized society. On the whole, Passing is, in contrast to the title, the story of complete failure of two girls who tried to divide themselves from their race and be normal citizens adopted by the society. One of them, Irene Westover Redfield, was a common representative of the middle class who suffered from fears and discomfort being among people and who wanted only to be tranquil because security was the most important and desired thing in life (Larsen 235). Everywhere in the street she felt disturbance and threat of impermanence, instability and lack of confidence. All those symptoms, as Neil Sullivan (26) investigates, testify to Irenes inevitability of disintegrating subjectivity meaning that not only circumstances themselves were obstacles on her way to integration and passing, but from the very beginning, by her nature and through entire life she was never ready to become an adequate part of the community. For Irene, the reality was disgusting and she was disgusting to herself, she was awkward in that reality. Her friend, Clare Kendry Bellew, doesnt look like a Nig (as her own husband calls her playfully), but she has African routes and thus all her story is a story of inner conflict, of bifurcation and lack of perfectness, of wholeness. She struggled since her early childhood, as was born in misery and privation, and furthermore lost her father (alcoholic janitor) and had to live with her two white aunts, Grace and Edna, not a jot better than Cinderellas stepmother and sisters. From her early years she had to work hard, and the aunts even tried to persuade her that physical labor was nothing but useful for her. And at the same time she had to tolerate not only physical exploitation, but also moral tension because loving relatives never missed a trick to remind her where she was from and what she was like. But nevertheless she didnt make complaints against her life: I was, it was true, expected to earn my keep by doing all the housework, and most of the washing. But do you realize, Rene, t hat if it hadnt been for them, I shouldnt have had a home in the world? (Larsen 158). Clare is described as truly light (as her name is translated) person trying to enjoy life and to take everything from it, but again, from the very beginning, she is doomed as she has no integrity in herself and cant find stability neither at home nor outside. Her husband, a white financier John Bellew, leads on the processing started by her aunts: he repeats again and again that he hated Negroes and that no Negroes can live in his house: When we were first married, she was as white as as well as white as a lily. But I declare shes gettin darker and darker. I tell her if she dont look out, shell wake up one of these days and find shes turned into a nigger, he jokes (171). If Clare could simply forget her origin and live a normal life of a white person, she may have found serenity and her place under the sun. But the hostile attitude and moods of the nearest, let alone rest of the society leaves n o chance for her. She is punched by words, and she is constantly being lynched morally. Hence her end is determined from the very beginning. Her passing is determined as, to certain extent, the author uses the word not only in the meaning of merging of African Americans with the white community in the United States, but obviously in its colloquial meaning standing for death. The two girls fates are tightly bound and one is used to tint another one. They are different, but they have much in common, and their lives turn to interweave in strange, dramatic matter. The two persons conflicting each within herself cant help conflicting with other, and passions burning between them have ambiguous nature. The uneasy circumstances have made them suspicious and emotionally very sensitive, therefore by interaction they not only help each other to survive, but do help each other to fade. The matter is, assimilation is always a problem, even when all the circumstances are favorable and the accepting party is really adopting. A lot of things must be changed in your conscience, in your style of life, in your attitude to things of everyday life and, broader, you view of the world. The question, what is more, is why you should forget your true identity, why you have to play your origin false and adjust to others. It is always difficult to put up with such injustice, and no matter how hard you try, you will always stay the second sort. Sometimes such subordination is hidden well, and with time you may forget about all those difficulties. But when day after day you are reminded that you are mud blood (nigger, nig, creature, boy,), how much strength do you need to cope with it? Especially it turns out to be unbearable for Clare who is already not belonging to the Black community and neither is she one of the Whites. Then, negative reputation is regularly supported by media, they are accused of all the most awful crimes, and this prejudice based only on the color of their skin is being spread from family to family, from generation to generation. The cycle with no way out. Or, to be more precise, with the only way out chosen by Clare the entrance to freedom through the window. In the meantime her need for recognition was much higher than Irenes. Clare experiences deliberate courting of attention (203); her husband has taken her out of poverty and provided her with almost everything for happy bourgeois living. So she spends days dressing this and that and trying to adopt white values, but cant find peace and through the whole novel seeks for the answer from everyone: what am I to you? What am I of you? It is interesting to underline that the two girls benefit from each other: While Clare claims Irene as her link to blackness, Irene mediates her desire for whiteness through Clare (Sullivan 31). When associated with Clare, Irene finally was aware what was wrong in her life and she feels sorry that Clare was not born a Negro (Larsen 225). The conflict is sharpened in the scene with letters from Clare torn by Irene: The destruction completed, she gathered them up, rose, and moved to the trains end. Standing there, she dropped them over railing and watched them scatter, on tracks, on cinders, on forlorn grass, in rills of dirty water (178). While we are all dependent on what others think of us, it is not easy to stay cheerful when you are oppressed on the ground of your minority identity. In this way total rejection brings Clare to the tragic final: Clare vanishes, and Irene faints in pursuit of her. Panama: An Introduction Panama: An Introduction Panama La Republica de Panama, or just simply Panama, is a country slightly smaller than South Carolina located south of Costa Rica and north of Columbia. Panama is most famous for the Panama Canal, which allows passage from the Caribbean Sea to the Pacific Ocean. Panama has a chain of mountains along the west of the country, has moderate hills in the interior, and has flat land along the east coast. There are vast forests in Panamas tropical weather. Panamas tropical temperature makes it possible for Panama to grow its biggest exports: coffee, sugar, shrimp, bananas, etc. However, Panama cannot grow or manufacture certain items, such as capital goods, foodstuffs, consumer goods, and chemicals. Some of Panamas major trading partners include the U.S., Sweden, Spain, Netherlands, Costa Rica, Antilles, Japan, Mexico, and Colombia. Panama has one of the most important trading ports in the world. Its geographical location makes it one of the busiest ports in the world. Panama is most famous for the internationally known Panama Canal. The Panama Canal was first thought up in 1513 by Charles V, who at the time was the king of Spain. Although Charles V never followed through, the Spaniards built paved roads to transport goods. In 1880, French companies directed by Ferdinand de Lesseps, the builder of the Suez Canal, started construction on the Panama Canal. After seven years, the project was abandoned. In 1903, when Panama was declared independent, a treaty was signed which authorized the United States to begin construction of the canal in 1904. The canal was completed and started operation on August 15, 1914, when the US cargo ship, Ancon, made a historic first passage. However, before the canal was built, Panama struggled for its independence from Columbia. In 1821, Central America revolted against Spain, which is when Panama joined Columbia. For the next eighty-two years, Panama unsuccessfully tried to break away from Columbia. Between 1850 and 1900, Panama had 40 administrations, 50 riots, 5 attempted secessions, and 13 US interventions. Panama eventually gained its independence in 1903, with US giving its support. The Panamanian flag was a symbol of the newly freed country once it gained its independence from Columbia. It was designed be Mr. Amador Guerrero and it was made by his wife, Ms. Maria Ossa de Amador. The flag was baptized on December 20, 1903 by Reverend Fray Bernardino. It is celebrated on November 1. Today, the Panamanian government is an example of a constitutional democracy. It contains executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. The executive branch consists of a president and two vice-presidents. The presidential position is held by Martin Torrijos Espino and the two vice-presidential positions are held by Samuel Lewis Navarro and Ruben Arosemena Valdes. The Legislative Branch has a unicameral National Assembly which contains seventy eight seats. The judicial branch is a Supreme Court of Justice, which contains nine judges who serve ten year terms, five superior courts, and three courts of appeal. When the Spanish controlled Panama, they brought with them Spanish cultures and traditions, creating a new culture. The natives of Panama, the Kuna, are a close community. They are close with their families and live a simple way of life. In the Kunas culture, ties are passed from the mothers side of the family, meaning that after the marriage, the husband must move into the wifes familys house and work for her family. In all countries, sports are a major part of the culture. Panama is no exception. The main sport in Panama today is baseball. Some of the Major League Baseball most prominent baseball players have come out of Panama. The most famous of them include Rod Carew, who played for the Minnesota Twins and the California Angels, Omar Moreno, who played for the Pittsburg Pirates, Ben Oglivie, who played for the Boston Red Sox, Detroit Tigers, and the Milwaukee Brewers, Mariano Rivera, who currently plays for the Yankees, and Manny Sanguillen, who played mainly with the Pittsburg Pirates and briefly with the Oakland Athletics. Some of todays Panamanian baseball players include Manuel Corpas, who plays for the Colorado Rockies, Carlos Lee, who plays for the Houston Astros, Mariano Rivera, who plays for the New York Yankees, Carlos Ruiz, who plays for the Philadelphia Phillies, and Olmedo Saenz, who plays for the Los Angeles Dodgers. As well as sports, food is a major part of a countrys culture. Some of Panamas most popular dishes include carimanola, empanadas, tortillas, tamales, tajadas, and patacones. Carimanola is a roll made from ground and boiled yucca and filled with chopped meat and boiled eggs. The roll is then fried before it is served. Empanadas are similar to a Cornish pastry that can be filled with meat, chicken, or cheese. Tortillas are a common meal in all of Latin America. In Panama, tortillas are made from ground maize and fried like a pancake. Tamales are a local delicacy made from boiled ground corn with spices, chicken, or pork inside. It is then wrapped in a banana leaf and boiled before serving. Tajadas are a dish that that are more commonly known as platano maduros. It is made from a ripe plantain cut i slices, length ways and baked with cinnamon. Lastly, patacones, also known as tostones, is made from green fried plantain, which is cut crossways in pieces, with salt, pressed and fried. Today, Panama remains most famous for the Panama Canal. However, it has also received attention from people due o the fact that one of their former leaders is imprisoned in Miami, Florida as a result of drug trafficking charges. Manuel Noriega used to be one of the United States top allies in Latin America. However, their relationship deteriorated when it was discovered that Noriega was a major player in drug trafficking in the Panamanian region. The US also accused him of violating human rights and rigging elections in 1989. Soon after their was a stand-off between US forces stationed at the Panama canal zone and Noriegas soldiers. Later, President Bush Sr. launched an invasion of Panama because a US marine was killed in Panama City. Noriega surrendered to US forces in 1990 and was flown to the US as a prisoner of war. He was found guilty of multiple charges and was sentenced to forty years in prison which was later reduced to thirty years in 1999. After serving seventeen years in p rison, he was scheduled for release on September 9 of this year. However, he is now wanted by the French for using profits from drug trafficking to buy land and remains imprisoned. In conclusion, Panama has a culture and history decorated by the people, food, and infrastructures that it has become famous for. Most people know Panama for the Panama Canal, but Panama is more than the Canal. People who will go down in American culture have come out of Panama. These people, such as Mariano Rivera and Rod Carew, have imprinted themselves into Americas favorite past-time (baseball). Panama has bred a culture that has made a name for itself in todays society and will forever be known for it uniqueness and cultural and historical offerings.