When you think that of economic activities which can be more more likely to be frowned upon by society – equivalent to offering bribes, paying for the services of a sex employee, and even selling human organs – “trust” and “loyalty” will not be the primary things that come to mind come to mind. But these seemingly positive qualities play a key role in people disguising illegal transactions as something more socially acceptable, my colleague Gabriel Rossman and I recently found it a series of experiments.
As a Professor of Management who heads the University of Arizona Center for Trust StudiesI actually have long been fascinated about how people hide illegal economic activity. One vital way is what scientists call “obfuscation” – hide the true nature of an exchange to avoid social judgment or legal control. For example, a one that desires to hire a sex employee may disguise their payment as a more socially acceptable “gift,” while someone who desires to bribe a politician might make a “campaign contribution” as a substitute.
Through our experiments, we examined the strategies people use to hide morally questionable transactions – what researchers call “disguised, disreputable exchanges.” We found that folks select these shady activities because they trust the opposite person they’re working with.
In our experiments, we put 1,276 participants within the position of an actual estate developer whose constructing permit application requires an exception to the zoning ordinance. Participants were then told that town constructing inspector's pickup truck had broken down and that in the event that they bought him a brand new one, he could be more inclined to lubricate the wheels for his or her application.
We found that participants were more more likely to select this feature—a disguised exchange—over inaction or outright bribery after they believed they might trust their counterpart. We also found that the variety of trust matters: When trust relies on a belief in the opposite person's loyalty, individuals are more likely to simply accept the gift. However, when trust comes from belief in the opposite's ethical standards, they hesitate and fear the moral implications of their actions.
Why it matters
In the shadow of the legitimate market, a special sort of economy thrives – one dominated by the transfer of products and goods Services of this company thinks it’s morally unsuitable. Our study examines this hidden economy and examines how individuals take care of transactions surrounded by moral ambiguity. Our work not only helps us understand the mechanisms of those illicit exchanges, but additionally provides fundamental insights into human behavior and social norms.
Our results point to a fundamental fact: people wish to pursue their very own interests while being liked by others. When these two goals conflict, it’s tempting to create a false appearance of seriousness. And trust plays a key role on this.
A key conclusion of our research is that trust has a dark side. This contradicts that positive view of trust that many researchers have, due to its role in promoting collaboration and reduction Transaction costs. Our research shows that trust can even have socially less desirable effects – equivalent to enabling bribery.
Trust can play contradictory roles since it has two fundamental dimensions: loyalty and ethics. Loyalty refers to an individual's goodwill and desire to assist, while ethics has to do with acceptable principles – particularly probity and truthfulness – to which an individual is committed. Both play a very important role in shaping whether individuals are viewed as trustworthy.
People often imagine that loyalty and ethics go hand in hand. This makes perfect sense: if someone behaves ethically towards their community, one can assume that they’d also fulfill their obligations towards a person. However, with unclean exchanges, this connection breaks down. Our work shows that folks are more likely to have interaction in shady dealings with those that display trustworthiness based on loyalty and fewer likely with those whose trustworthiness relies on a way of ethics.
Another intriguing aspect of our results is that trustworthiness based on loyalty—versus trustworthiness based on ethics—reduces moral discomfort, or the negative feelings related to morally inappropriate actions. Each party adjusts its sense of what it means to be good because it trusts that the opposite is not going to judge them for a little bit of malice.
What isn’t yet known
Our research opens latest avenues for examining how trust operates in morally gray markets. It raises questions on the fragility of trust in these contexts, the impact of fixing social norms on what people find morally acceptable, and the broader implications for our understanding of trust and morality in society.
As researchers proceed to uncover the layers of trust that underlie the shadow economy, these questions invite us to contemplate how people navigate the stress between personal gain and communal moral standards—a dynamic that affects not only hidden economies, but structure of society itself.
image credit : theconversation.com