Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 126, Issue 2, pp 247–258 | Cite as

University Lecturers’ Intention to Teach an Ethics Course: A Test of Competing Models

  • Pi-Yueh Cheng


Business ethics are the moral principles that apply to all aspects of the business environment at an individual and organizational level. This study addresses the basic perceptions regarding the teaching of business ethics and examines university lecturers’ intentions to teach an ethics course. For the present research, the authors conducted a cross study to evaluate whether three variations of the theory of planned behavior, namely, TPB, decomposed TPB (DTPB), and the revised theory of planned behavior (RTPB), could adequately predict teaching of ethics course (TEC) behaviors. The participants were from southern, middle, and northern Taiwan. A structural equation model applied to a final sample of 200 usable questionnaires demonstrated that individual attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and teacher self-efficacy (TSE) influence intentions, but do not influence report behavior of those involved in teaching an ethics course. Among the three variations of TPB-based models, RTPB provided better explanation of variance in intentions to TEC. The present research highlights the importance of TSE, especially because TSE plays a key role in RTPB. The theoretical implications of this study relate to the application of TPB to TEC.


Business ethics education Intention to teach Theory of planned behavior Teacher self-efficacy 



The author would like to thank the National Science Council of Republic of China for financially supporting this research (NSC 100-2511-S-165-002), and Prof. Chin-Sheng Wan and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments.


  1. Åberg, L. (2001). Attitudes. In P. E. Barjonet (Ed.), Traffic psychology today. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhi & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1987). Attitudes, traits, and actions: Dispositional prediction of behavior in personality and social psychology. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 1–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ali, I., Grigore, G. F., & Ahmad, J. (2012). University teachers’ perceptions toward teaching business ethics. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3637–3641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(1), 139–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Blanchard, G., Makombu, J. G., & Kestemont, P. (2008). Influence of different dietary 18:3n-3/18:2n-6 ratio on growth performance, fatty acid composition and hepatic ultrastructure in Eurasian perch, Perca fluviatilis. Aquaculture, 284, 144–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Blanthorne, C., Kovar, S. E., & Fisher, D. G. (2007). Accounting educators’ opinions about ethics in the curriculum: An extensive view. Issues in Accounting Education, 22(3), 355–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Boatright, J. R. (2008). Ethics in finance (2nd ed.). Malden: Blackwell Pub.Google Scholar
  18. Brislin, R. W. (1976). Comparative research methodology: Cross-cultural studies. International Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organization research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67(1), 26–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chen, Y. J., & Tang, T. L. P. (2013). The bright and dark sides of religiosity among university students: Do gender, college major, and income matter? Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 531–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, G. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1, 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elmore, R. H. (1995). Teaching, learning, and school organization: Principles of practice and the regularities of schooling. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 31(3), 355–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eschenfelder, B. (2011). The role of narrative in public relations ethics pedagogy. Public Relations Review, 37, 450–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  25. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable and measurement errors. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ghaffari, F., Kyriacou, O., & Brennan, R. (2008). Exploring the implementation of ethics in U.K. accounting programs. Issues in Accounting Education, 23(2), 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gist, M. E., & Mitchell, T. R. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17, 183–211.Google Scholar
  29. Hair, F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Herrera, C. G., & Pina-Stranger, A. (2010). The effect of organizational structure and publication activities on email dynamics in higher education organizations: The case of Catholic university of Chile. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 26, 116–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  33. Kuo, F. Y., & Young, M. L. (2008). Predicting knowledge sharing practices through intention: A test of competing models. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2697–2722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lau, C. L. L. (2010). A step forward: Ethics education matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 92, 565–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin, B. J., & Chiou, W. B. (2010). Undergraduates’ intentions to take a second language proficiency test: A comparison of predicting from the theory of planed behavior and social cognitive theory. Psychological Reports, 106, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lumpe, A. T., Haney, J. J., & Czerniak, C. M. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 275–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manstead, A. S. R., & Parker, D. (1995). Evaluating and extending the theory of planned behaviour. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 69–95). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  38. Mintz, S. (2006). Accounting ethics education: Integrating reflective learning and virtue ethics. Journal of Accounting Education, 24, 97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mussweiler, T., & Ruter, K. (2003). What friends are for! The use of routine standards in social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 467–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Overton, R. H. (2006). Teaching ethics in the financial planning curriculum: A case study. Journal of Business & Economic Research, 4(3), 23–28.Google Scholar
  41. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sadaf, A., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2012). Exploring pre-services’ beliefs about using Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 classroom. Computers & Education, 59, 937–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwarzer, R., Schmitz, G. S., & Daytner, G. T. (1999). Teacher self-efficacy. Retrieved April 5, 2013, from
  44. Sims, R. R., & Felton, E. L. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics: Teaching and delivering. Journal of Business Ethics, 63(3), 297–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (2003). Social cognitive theory and self-efficacy. In R. M. Steers, L. W. Porter, & G. A. Bigley (Eds.), Motivation and work behavior (7th ed., pp. 126–140). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  48. Taiwan Ministry of Education. (2012). Retrieved May 27, 2013, from
  49. Tavousi, M., Hidarnia, A. R., Montazeri, A., Hajizadeh, E., Taremain, F., & Ghofranipour, F. (2009). Are perceived behavioral control and self-efficacy distinct constructs? European Journal of Scientific Research, 30, 146–152.Google Scholar
  50. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 16(3), 144–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Teo, T., Koh, N. K., & Lee, C. B. (2011). Teachers’ intention to teach financial literacy in Singapore: A path analysis of an extended theory of planned behavior. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(2), 410–419.Google Scholar
  52. Terry, D. J., & O’Leary, J. E. (1995). The theory of planned behavior: The effects of perceived behavioral control and self-efficacy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 199–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tschnnen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Watson, G. (2006). Technology professional development: Long-term effects on teacher self-efficacy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 151–166.Google Scholar
  55. White, K. M., O’Conor, E. L., & Hamilton, K. (2011). In-group and role identity influences on the initiation and maintenance of student’s voluntary attendance at peer study sessions for statistics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. White, K. M., Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1994). Safer sex behavior: The role of attitudes, norms, and control factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 2164–2192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wu, Y. C. J., Huang, S., Kuo, L., & Wu, W. S. (2010). Management education for sustainability: A web-based content analysis. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 520–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of FinanceTainan University of TechnologyTainanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations