Active Versus Passive Approaches to Whistleblowing

• In Event: Posters I

Abstract

Whistleblowing – the act of notifying an authority figure of another individual’s misconduct – is directly relevant to many interactions within the criminal justice system. Documentation of incidents of misconduct can be found in the form of biased eyewitness identification and line-up procedures, coercive interrogation practices, and evidence-gathering tactics. Past research suggests individuals are willing to accept inappropriate information (Miceli, Dozier & Near, 1991; Brocchiaro, Zimbardo, & Van Lange, 2011), and are more likely to report they would blow the whistle compared to the percent of individuals who actually do report misconduct (Brocchiaro et al., 2011). In this study, we manipulated whether participants were exposed to inappropriate test information (present versus absent) from a junior experimenter, and the type of opportunity participants had to report the misconduct to a senior-level experimenter (active versus passive questioning). We found that type of questioning had a moderately affected participants’ willingness to report misconduct; participants actively questioned were more likely to report misconduct (M = 0.50) compared to those passively questioned (M = 0.33). Results and possible avenues for future research will be presented. This study has implications for interactions within the criminal justice system, specifically hierarchical relationships.

Authors

• Dainius Simpkins, University of Florida

• Kelsey Henderson, Portland State University