{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/84588"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/84588","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"The Role of Self-Concept in the Observer's Perception of Theft","abstract":"This research examined factors predicted to affect observers' perceptions and labeling of co-worker theft, observers' reporting of co-worker theft, and observers' own theft behavior in a laboratory and field context. Three factors were hypothesized to influence these variables. The first factor is whether the observer is schematic with respect to honesty. Honesty schematicity affected whether observers would report theft and engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study and affected intentions to report theft in the field study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to report theft and were less likely to engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to indicate that they would report theft in the field study. The second factor is similarity of observer-co-worker characteristics. Observer-co-worker similarity showed no effects in the laboratory study but affected labeling, reporting, and theft behavior in the field study. Observers were less likely to label and report behavior of targets who they perceived as similar and were more likely to engage in theft behavior when a similar co-worker engaged in that behavior. Additional analyses indicated that the relation between similarity and reporting was mediated by the labeling of theft. The final factor is the ambiguity of the observed theft. Event ambiguity affected labeling and reporting in the laboratory study and in the field study. In general, observers were more likely to label and report less ambiguous theft events. Additional analyses indicated that labeling of theft and perceptions of theft seriousness mediated the relation between event ambiguity and reporting. Implications for understanding theft behavior in organizations are discussed.","abstract_html":"This research examined factors predicted to affect observers' perceptions and labeling of co-worker theft, observers' reporting of co-worker theft, and observers' own theft behavior in a laboratory and field context. Three factors were hypothesized to influence these variables. The first factor is whether the observer is schematic with respect to honesty. Honesty schematicity affected whether observers would report theft and engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study and affected intentions to report theft in the field study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to report theft and were less likely to engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to indicate that they would report theft in the field study. The second factor is similarity of observer-co-worker characteristics. Observer-co-worker similarity showed no effects in the laboratory study but affected labeling, reporting, and theft behavior in the field study. Observers were less likely to label and report behavior of targets who they perceived as similar and were more likely to engage in theft behavior when a similar co-worker engaged in that behavior. Additional analyses indicated that the relation between similarity and reporting was mediated by the labeling of theft. The final factor is the ambiguity of the observed theft. Event ambiguity affected labeling and reporting in the laboratory study and in the field study. In general, observers were more likely to label and report less ambiguous theft events. Additional analyses indicated that labeling of theft and perceptions of theft seriousness mediated the relation between event ambiguity and reporting. Implications for understanding theft behavior in organizations are discussed.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Schmidtke, James M."],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Business Administration","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Kulik, Carol T."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2015,"date_issued":"2015-09-25T22:21:46Z","date_published":"2015-09-25T22:21:46Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:23Z","subjects":["Sociology, Criminology and Penology"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["(MiAaPQ)AAI9737244"],"render_values":[{"text":"(MiAaPQ)AAI9737244","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/84588","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Kulik, Carol T."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Schmidtke, James M."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2015-09-25T22:21:46Z","10000-01-01","1997"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Business Administration"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Sociology, Criminology and Penology"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/84588","(MiAaPQ)AAI9737244"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["This research examined factors predicted to affect observers' perceptions and labeling of co-worker theft, observers' reporting of co-worker theft, and observers' own theft behavior in a laboratory and field context. Three factors were hypothesized to influence these variables. The first factor is whether the observer is schematic with respect to honesty. Honesty schematicity affected whether observers would report theft and engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study and affected intentions to report theft in the field study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to report theft and were less likely to engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to indicate that they would report theft in the field study. The second factor is similarity of observer-co-worker characteristics. Observer-co-worker similarity showed no effects in the laboratory study but affected labeling, reporting, and theft behavior in the field study. Observers were less likely to label and report behavior of targets who they perceived as similar and were more likely to engage in theft behavior when a similar co-worker engaged in that behavior. Additional analyses indicated that the relation between similarity and reporting was mediated by the labeling of theft. The final factor is the ambiguity of the observed theft. Event ambiguity affected labeling and reporting in the laboratory study and in the field study. In general, observers were more likely to label and report less ambiguous theft events. Additional analyses indicated that labeling of theft and perceptions of theft seriousness mediated the relation between event ambiguity and reporting. Implications for understanding theft behavior in organizations are discussed.","Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-25T22:21:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4848 bytes, checksum: 96035ab3f5e1c23cc7138a224ce498bd (MD5) 9737244.pdf: 3902468 bytes, checksum: d3727cc834eb2260438cc4295f2b956c (MD5) Previous issue date: 1997","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 85869 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","171 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1997."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Role of Self-Concept in the Observer's Perception of Theft"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Kulik, Carol T."],"dc:creator":["Schmidtke, James M."],"dc:date":["2015-09-25T22:21:46Z","10000-01-01","1997"],"dc:description":["This research examined factors predicted to affect observers' perceptions and labeling of co-worker theft, observers' reporting of co-worker theft, and observers' own theft behavior in a laboratory and field context. Three factors were hypothesized to influence these variables. The first factor is whether the observer is schematic with respect to honesty. Honesty schematicity affected whether observers would report theft and engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study and affected intentions to report theft in the field study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to report theft and were less likely to engage in theft behavior themselves in the laboratory study. Observers who were honesty schematics were more likely to indicate that they would report theft in the field study. The second factor is similarity of observer-co-worker characteristics. Observer-co-worker similarity showed no effects in the laboratory study but affected labeling, reporting, and theft behavior in the field study. Observers were less likely to label and report behavior of targets who they perceived as similar and were more likely to engage in theft behavior when a similar co-worker engaged in that behavior. Additional analyses indicated that the relation between similarity and reporting was mediated by the labeling of theft. The final factor is the ambiguity of the observed theft. Event ambiguity affected labeling and reporting in the laboratory study and in the field study. In general, observers were more likely to label and report less ambiguous theft events. Additional analyses indicated that labeling of theft and perceptions of theft seriousness mediated the relation between event ambiguity and reporting. Implications for understanding theft behavior in organizations are discussed.","Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-25T22:21:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4848 bytes, checksum: 96035ab3f5e1c23cc7138a224ce498bd (MD5) 9737244.pdf: 3902468 bytes, checksum: d3727cc834eb2260438cc4295f2b956c (MD5) Previous issue date: 1997","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 85869 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","171 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1997."],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/84588","(MiAaPQ)AAI9737244"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:subject":["Sociology, Criminology and Penology"],"dc:title":["The Role of Self-Concept in the Observer's Perception of Theft"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Business Administration"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:23Z"}