Evidence Of Social Desirability Response Bias In Ethics Research: An International Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">This paper analyzes the association between ethical perceptions of questionable business practices and Hofstede&rsquo;s Individualism, </span>Transparency International&rsquo;s C<span style="mso-bidi-font-style: italic;">orruption Index, and social desirability response bias.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The sample consists of 1,048 business students from ten countries: Canada, Colombia, Ecuador, Hong Kong, Ireland, Japan, Nepal, South Africa, Spain, and the United States.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The results of our analysis indicate that, while Hofstede&rsquo;s (1980) cultural construct of Individualism was significant for two of the questions, social desirability response bias was the most consistent variable in modeling subjects&rsquo; responses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Our data indicate that social desirability response bias should be controlled for when using self-reported data in ethics and/or international studies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span></span></span></span></p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.342 | 0.263 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it