Snitches Get Stitches and End Up in Ditches: A Systematic Review of the Factors Associated With Whistleblowing Intentions.
intentions
organizational
reporting
whistleblower
wrongdoing
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
20
11
2020
accepted:
22
06
2021
entrez:
22
10
2021
pubmed:
23
10
2021
medline:
23
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Blowing the whistle on corruption or wrongdoing can facilitate the detection, investigation, and then prosecution of a violation that may have otherwise gone undetected. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the factors that are associated with intentions to blow the whistle on wrongdoing. We searched Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Complete, Education Research Complete, ERIC, Medline, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Regional Business News, and SPORTDiscus in January 2020. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Of the 9,136 records identified, 217 studies were included in this systematic review. We identified 8 dimensions, 26 higher-order themes, and 119 lower-order themes. The whistleblowing dimensions were personal factors, organizational factors, cost and benefits, outcome expectancies, the offense, reporting, the wrongdoer, and social factors. Based on the findings, it is apparent that organizations should empower, educate, protect, support, and reward those who blow the whistle, in order to increase the likelihood on individuals blowing the whistle on corruption and wrongdoing. A combined approach may increase whistleblowing intentions, although research is required to test this assertion. From a policy perspective, more consistent protection is required across different countries.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34675830
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631538
pmc: PMC8523783
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
631538Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Nicholls, Fairs, Toner, Jones, Mantis, Barkoukis, Perry, Micle, Theodorou, Shakhverdieva, Stoicescu, Vesic, Dikic, Andjelkovic, Grimau, Amigo and Schomöller.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Health Psychol. 2008 Jul;13(5):607-23
pubmed: 18519435
Sports Med. 2014 Nov;44(11):1603-24
pubmed: 25138312
J Adv Nurs. 2002 May;38(3):303-9
pubmed: 11972671
Int J Drug Policy. 2020 Aug;82:102820
pubmed: 32563179
Account Res. 2019 Jan;26(1):17-32
pubmed: 30489163
Med Educ. 2006 Mar;40(3):269-77
pubmed: 16483330
J Bus Ethics. 2021;174(3):529-548
pubmed: 32836583
J Occup Health Psychol. 1996 Jan;1(1):27-41
pubmed: 9547031
Pak J Med Sci. 2018 Mar-Apr;34(2):429-434
pubmed: 29805421
J Health Organ Manag. 2019 Sep 5;33(6):737-756
pubmed: 31625824
Front Psychol. 2016 Nov 03;7:1674
pubmed: 27857697
Account Res. 2018;25(6):311-339
pubmed: 29954230
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2014 Dec;24(6):e515-521
pubmed: 24673128
J Nurs Manag. 2007 May;15(4):392-402
pubmed: 17456168
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n160
pubmed: 33781993
J Eval Clin Pract. 1999 Feb;5(1):13-21
pubmed: 10468380
Psychol Rep. 2013 Apr;112(2):626-36
pubmed: 23833888
Int J Surg. 2018 Apr;52:349-354
pubmed: 29428432
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 15;9:CD013574
pubmed: 33959956
Psychol Rep. 2008 Aug;103(1):121-33
pubmed: 18982945
Nurs Times. 2009 Sep 8-14;105(35):28-31
pubmed: 19791676
BMJ. 2005 Nov 5;331(7524):1064-5
pubmed: 16230312
Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 20;8:1015
pubmed: 28676778
Health Commun. 2010 Mar;25(2):155-64
pubmed: 20390681
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2020 Oct 01;6(1):e000800
pubmed: 33088583
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 May;121:20-28
pubmed: 31972274
Global Health. 2012 Jul 20;8:27
pubmed: 22818354
Med Educ. 2002 Feb;36(2):173-9
pubmed: 11869446
J Adv Nurs. 2016 May;72(5):1054-64
pubmed: 26768649
Psychol Health. 2011 Sep;26(9):1113-27
pubmed: 21929476
BMJ Qual Saf. 2012 Sep;21(9):791-9
pubmed: 22927492