Baiba Renerte

Unethical behavior, deception, and fraud are major concerns in corporate governance. This paper examines the effectiveness of contemplation questions (CQs) as ethical decision aids intended to activate moral agency and prompt employees to consider their actions from various perspectives (e.g., self, peers, company). Although we find that 44% of S&P 200 and Fortune Global 200 companies use CQs, their behavioral impact is not well understood. Using two preregistered, incentivized vignette experiments, we show that the effects of CQs depend critically on the level of engagement they require. In Study 1 (N = 1,986), where participants were only passively presented with CQs, we find no impact on ethical decisions, either in the aggregate or by reference group. In Study 2 (N = 1,322), where participants were actively engaged by answering CQs, we again find no overall effect, but uncover a striking heterogeneity: CQs marginally increase ethical decisions among individuals with high moral identity, yet significantly reduce such decisions among those with low moral identity. These findings align with a conceptual framework of motivated moral reasoning and suggest that while CQs can benefit some individuals, they may backfire precisely among those predisposed to unethical behavior.