CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 404Social Power and Status DynamicsEthics in Business and EducationSocial and Intergroup Psychology

Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically.

Dubois, David, Rucker, Derek D., Galinsky, Adam D.·2015·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
DOI 10.1037/pspi0000008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Are the rich more unethical than the poor? To answer this question, the current research introduces a key conceptual distinction between selfish and unethical behavior. Based on this distinction, the current article offers 2 novel findings that illuminate the relationship between social class and unethical behavior. First, the effects of social class on unethical behavior are not invariant; rather, the effects of social class are moderated by whether unethical behavior benefits the self or others. Replicating past work, social class positively predicted unethical behavior; however, this relationship was only observed when that behavior was self-beneficial. When unethical behavior was performed to benefit others, social class negatively predicted unethical behavior; lower class individuals were more likely than upper class individuals to engage in unethical behavior. Overall, social class predicts people's tendency to behave selfishly, rather than predicting unethical behavior per se. Second, individuals' sense of power drove the effects of social class on unethical behavior. Evidence for this relationship was provided in three forms. First, income, but not education level, predicted unethical behavior. Second, feelings of power mediated the effect of social class on unethical behavior, but feelings of status did not. Third, two distinct manipulations of power produced the same moderation by self-versus-other beneficiary as was found with social class. The current theoretical framework and data both synthesize and help to explain a range of findings in the social class and power literatures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/pspi0000008

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Dubois, Rucker, and Galinsky (2015) showed that the previously reported tendency for higher-class people to make more unethical decisions was only observed when the outcome was beneficial to the self.

    “Dubois, Rucker, and Galinsky (2015) varied who benefited from unethical behaviour and showed that the previously reported tendency for higher‐class people to make more unethical decisions was only observed when the outcome was beneficial to the self.”

    From The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour (2018) · cites this paper as Dubois, Rucker, and Galinsky (2015)

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D.
Affiliations
  • INSEAD (FR)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2015
Volume
108
Issue
3
Pages
436-449
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/pspi0000008
OpenAlex
W2004641479
Cited by
404
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 13
FWCI
144.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
social class, unethical behavior, selfishness, sense of power, status, income, educational attainment, self-other differences
MeSH terms
Adult, Ethics, Female, Games, Experimental, Humans, Deception, Male, Power, Psychological, Social Behavior, Social Class, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review