The Big Five and Informant Behavior: Can Personality Predict when Students Snitch?
Disciplines
Personality and Social Contexts | Social Psychology
Abstract (300 words maximum)
Snitching, whistleblowing, truth-telling, and reporting other’s misconduct could all be considered informant behaviors. The Big Five traits, which include agreeableness, neuroticism, consciousness, extraversion, and openness, have been shown to predict an array of behavior, including workplace whistleblowing. Bjorkelo et al. (2010) found that among employees, extraversion was positively related to whistleblowing and agreeableness was negatively related. We sought to extend this literature by exploring whether the Big Five traits predict informant behavior among strangers. This was done by examining college students’ likelihood of snitching in response to a false accusation.
Pairs of strangers (N = 114) participated in a study that was purported to measure communication via instant messaging. Participants completed the Mini International Personality Item Pool (I.e., Big Five; Donnellan et al., 2006). Afterwards, one participant from each pair was randomly assigned to play the part of a participant-confederate who cheats on a test and sends a text message plea for their partner to take the blame. Innocent participants were then confronted and questioned about the cheating.
Results indicated 44% of participants informed researchers that they witnessed their partner cheating and 39% showed researchers the text message plea. After running two logistic regression analyses in which the Big Five traits were entered as predictors and informant behavior served as an outcome variable, we discovered that none of the traits were predictors of informant behavior (ps > .155).
Although prior research found a connection between personality and whistleblowing, Bjorkelo et al.’s (2010) work was based on self-reported whistleblowing, whereas we observed actual informant behavior in real time. Thus, it is possible this measurement difference may account for the discrepancy. Given the importance of upholding ethical standards in the workplace and academia, future research should further explore the role of personality in informant behavior.
Academic department under which the project should be listed
RCHSS - Psychological Science
Primary Investigator (PI) Name
Jennifer Willard
The Big Five and Informant Behavior: Can Personality Predict when Students Snitch?
Snitching, whistleblowing, truth-telling, and reporting other’s misconduct could all be considered informant behaviors. The Big Five traits, which include agreeableness, neuroticism, consciousness, extraversion, and openness, have been shown to predict an array of behavior, including workplace whistleblowing. Bjorkelo et al. (2010) found that among employees, extraversion was positively related to whistleblowing and agreeableness was negatively related. We sought to extend this literature by exploring whether the Big Five traits predict informant behavior among strangers. This was done by examining college students’ likelihood of snitching in response to a false accusation.
Pairs of strangers (N = 114) participated in a study that was purported to measure communication via instant messaging. Participants completed the Mini International Personality Item Pool (I.e., Big Five; Donnellan et al., 2006). Afterwards, one participant from each pair was randomly assigned to play the part of a participant-confederate who cheats on a test and sends a text message plea for their partner to take the blame. Innocent participants were then confronted and questioned about the cheating.
Results indicated 44% of participants informed researchers that they witnessed their partner cheating and 39% showed researchers the text message plea. After running two logistic regression analyses in which the Big Five traits were entered as predictors and informant behavior served as an outcome variable, we discovered that none of the traits were predictors of informant behavior (ps > .155).
Although prior research found a connection between personality and whistleblowing, Bjorkelo et al.’s (2010) work was based on self-reported whistleblowing, whereas we observed actual informant behavior in real time. Thus, it is possible this measurement difference may account for the discrepancy. Given the importance of upholding ethical standards in the workplace and academia, future research should further explore the role of personality in informant behavior.