Does anyone know of any psychological studies on corruption specifically?

[Lark]

Does anyone know of any psychological studies of corruption specifically?

I'm aware of the obedience to authority tests, although I've heard that both the actors posing as electrocuted and Stanford prison experiments have problems with replication or falseability, so can be considered as poor evidence, I also think they deal with compromises of what I might describe as normal "liberality" and "authority/authoritarianism".

I'm also aware of the Asylums writing by Goffman, behaviour in institutions kind of thing, which is maybe closer to what I'm talking about but not exactly either.

I'm wondering about the motivations to take bribes, tolerate misconduct, exercise blindspots, that sort of thing. It is perhaps something which has been covered more within economics, the whole self-interest angle perhaps.

 

[Fluffywolf]

I dont know of any sources concerning this, but find the topic quite interesting as well.

Makes me think about the incidents I haven't acted upon even when my own judgement and rationality tells me I should have.

Turning a blind eye, it is a form of corruption that has definately plagued my mind. Although its quite a bit better nowadays, I still am not sure where it truely comes from. Its quite deeply rooted. A combination of lazyness, procrastination, e9 harmony and biased internal values that desperately need revisiting.

In those cases, even though I was aware of the fact I took a stance I dont actually believe in, there also seems no strong urge to change it. As if there is a corruption monkey temporarily disconnecting normally useful and valid neuron links.

 

[prplchknz]

try google scholar or even better if you have acess to a university's library you can usually search their catalog online and find peer reviewed sources.

 

[Metis]

Does anyone know of any psychological studies of corruption specifically?

I'm aware of the obedience to authority tests, although I've heard that both the actors posing as electrocuted and Stanford prison experiments have problems with replication or falseability, so can be considered as poor evidence, I also think they deal with compromises of what I might describe as normal "liberality" and "authority/authoritarianism".

I'm also aware of the Asylums writing by Goffman, behaviour in institutions kind of thing, which is maybe closer to what I'm talking about but not exactly either.

I'm wondering about the motivations to take bribes, tolerate misconduct, exercise blindspots, that sort of thing. It is perhaps something which has been covered more within economics, the whole self-interest angle perhaps.

Erving Goffman is on my list of authors whose books I need to read. Started reading one of them a couple years ago. Had to return it to the library before I got around to finishing it. Interesting book.

Victor Frankl wrote about corruption in regards to the capos. In that situation, it was related to desperation. However, I've experienced the desire to emulate people who were making my life hell, so I wonder if that was also part of it in their situation: that they wanted to be like the people who appeared to be successful, which in their case were the concentration camp guards, the same people oppressing them. But that's one possible motivation that doesn't apply to all situations. It might--or might not--explain the capos, but it doesn't explain the nazis, especially the leaders.