MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353084905 · doi:10.1111/beer.12505

Behavioral economics and monetary wisdom: A cross‐level analysis of monetary aspiration, pay (dis)satisfaction, risk perception, and corruption in 32 nations

2023· article· en· W4353084905 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Li‐Ping Tang, Zhen Li, Mehmet Ferhat Özbek, Vivien K. G. Lim, Thompson S.H. Teo, Mahfooz A. Ansari, Toto Sutarso, Ilya Garber, Randy Ki‐Kwan Chiu, Brigitte Charles‐Pauvers, Caroline Urbain, Roberto Luna Arocas, Jingqiu Chen, Ningyu Tang, Theresa Li‐Na Tang, Fernando Arias‐Galicia, Consuelo de la Torre, Peter Vlerick, Adebowale Akande, Abdulqawi Salim Al‐Zubaidi, Ali Mahdi Kazem, Mark G. Borg, Bor‐Shiuan Cheng, Linzhi Du, Abdul Hamid Safwat Ibrahim, Kilsun Kim, Éva Málovics, Richard T. Mpoyi, Obiajulu Anthony Ugochukwu Nnedum, Elisaveta Gjorgji Sardžoska, Michael Allen, Rosário Correia, Chin‐Kang Jen, Alice S. Moreira, Johnston E. Osagie, Aahad M. Osman-Gani, Ruja Pholsward, Marko Polič, Petar Skobic, Allen F. Stembridge, Luigina Canova, Anna Maria Manganelli, Adrian H. Pitariu, Francisco José Costa Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Ethics the Environment & Responsibility · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDishonestyLanguage changeEconomicsProspect theorySocial psychologyPsychologyPublic economicsMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Corruption involves greed, money, and risky decision‐making. We explore the love of money, pay satisfaction, probability of risk, and dishonesty across cultures. Avaricious monetary aspiration breeds unethicality. Prospect theory frames decisions in the gains‐losses domain and high‐low probability. Pay dissatisfaction (in the losses domain) incites dishonesty in the name of justice at the individual level. The Corruption Perceptions Index, CPI, signals a high‐low probability of getting caught for dishonesty at the country level. We theorize that decision‐makers adopt avaricious love‐of‐money aspiration as a lens and frame dishonesty in the gains‐losses domain (pay satisfaction‐dissatisfaction, Level 1) and high‐low probability (CPI, Level 2) to maximize expected utility and ultimate serenity. We challenge the myth: Pay satisfaction mitigates dishonesty across nations consistently. Based on 6500 managers in 32 countries, our cross‐level three‐dimensional visualization offers the following discoveries. Under high aspiration conditions, pay dissatisfaction excites the highest‐ (third‐highest) avaricious justice‐seeking dishonesty in high (medium) CPI nations, supporting the certainty effect. However, pay satisfaction provokes the second‐highest avaricious opportunity‐seizing dishonesty in low CPI entities, sustaining the possibility effect—maximizing expected utility. Under low aspiration conditions, high pay satisfaction consistently leads to low dishonesty, demonstrating risk aversion—achieving ultimate serenity. We expand prospect theory from a micro and individual‐level theory to a cross‐level theory of monetary wisdom across 32 nations. We enhance the S‐shaped Curve to three 3‐D corruption surfaces across three levels of the global economic pyramid, providing novel insights into behavioral economics, business ethics, the environment, and responsibility.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Ethics the Environment & ResponsibilitySame topicExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFrench-language works237,207