THE INFLUENCE OF SELF-DISCIPLINE AND THE CORRUPTING POTENTIAL OF THE MERE EXPOSURE EFFECT
- Carlos Imbrosio Filho
- Oct 25, 2024
- 5 min read
Updated: Feb 3
APA full citation: Filho, C. I. (2024, October 26). The Influence of Self-Discipline and the Corrupting Potential of the Mere Exposure Effect. EBS I&D Centre. https://www.ebscentre.org/society/
Abstract
Self-discipline, often viewed as a key component of personal and professional success, helps individuals resist impulses and remain focused on long-term goals. The development of self-discipline is essential in contexts ranging from personal development to professional decision-making, where distractions and ethical challenges abound. However, the psychological concept of the mere exposure effect, which suggests that repeated exposure to stimuli increases an individual's affinity for them, can undermine self-discipline and even foster corruption. This article explores the relationship between self-discipline and the mere exposure effect, examining how repeated exposure to unethical practices can normalize them, leading to a gradual erosion of moral standards. The article draws on psychological and sociological research to offer a nuanced understanding of the mechanisms by which the mere exposure effect may contribute to the breakdown of ethical behavior and self-regulation in individuals.
Keywords: Self-discipline, Mere exposure effect, Corruption, Ethical behavior, Moral standards
Introduction
Self-discipline is defined as the ability to control one's emotions, behavior, and desires in the face of external demands and distractions (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). It is often viewed as a crucial factor in achieving long-term success and maintaining ethical behavior. While self-discipline enables individuals to resist short-term temptations in favor of long-term benefits, it is vulnerable to external influences. The mere exposure effect (Zajonc, 1968), a psychological phenomenon where repeated exposure to a stimulus leads to increased liking of that stimulus, may present a risk to self-discipline, particularly in environments where unethical behaviors are normalized.
The purpose of this article is to explore how the mere exposure effect can undermine self-discipline, potentially leading individuals into corrupt behaviors. By examining existing psychological theories and empirical evidence, this article aims to contribute to our understanding of how repeated exposure to certain environments and practices can lead to moral erosion.
Self-Discipline: A Protective Barrier
Self-discipline has been widely recognized as a critical determinant of personal and professional success. According to Baumeister and Tierney (2011), self-discipline enables individuals to regulate their behavior and emotions, allowing them to align their actions with long-term goals rather than succumbing to immediate gratification. This capability is essential in high-stakes environments, such as law enforcement or corporate governance, where individuals must resist the temptation to engage in unethical behavior.
However, the effectiveness of self-discipline is not impervious to external factors. In environments where unethical practices are widespread, self-discipline alone may not be sufficient to prevent moral compromise. As individuals are repeatedly exposed to unethical behavior, their moral judgments may become desensitized, weakening their resolve to act ethically. The psychological process responsible for this shift can be understood through the lens of the mere exposure effect.
* Refer to the book The Power of Discipline from Daniel Walter for individual consciousness and self-empowerment.
The Mere Exposure Effect: A Path to Moral Desensitization
The mere exposure effect, first identified by Zajonc (1968), posits that individuals develop a preference for stimuli simply through repeated exposure. While originally studied in the context of neutral or positive stimuli, this phenomenon has implications for exposure to negative or unethical behaviors as well. When individuals are repeatedly exposed to unethical actions—such as bribery, fraud, or misconduct—they may gradually come to view these actions as less morally objectionable.
Empirical research supports this idea. In a study by Monin and Miller (2001), individuals who were repeatedly exposed to morally ambiguous situations demonstrated a decreased sensitivity to ethical dilemmas. Over time, they became more likely to tolerate or even engage in unethical behavior. The mere exposure effect thus has the potential to corrupt individuals by gradually eroding their moral standards and weakening their self-discipline.
This process is particularly insidious because the mere exposure effect operates subconsciously. Individuals may not be aware that their repeated exposure to unethical behavior is influencing their moral judgments. As their sensitivity to ethical concerns diminishes, they may begin to rationalize corrupt actions, seeing them as part of the "normal" environment.
* An in-depth development in this theory can be found in a scientific article written by Charlotte Nickerson published at Simply Psychology.
The Interplay Between Self-Discipline and Corruption
While self-discipline serves as a protective mechanism against unethical behavior, its effectiveness can be compromised by the mere exposure effect. The gradual desensitization that occurs through repeated exposure to unethical behavior weakens the internal resistance that self-discipline provides. Over time, individuals may find it more difficult to uphold ethical standards, even if they were initially highly disciplined.
This erosion of self-discipline can lead to what Darley (2005) describes as "slippery slope" corruption, where small ethical compromises eventually lead to larger ones. The normalization of unethical behavior through repeated exposure creates an environment in which self-discipline is no longer enough to maintain ethical integrity.
Furthermore, the mere exposure effect may influence individuals' perceptions of their own behavior. As individuals become more familiar with unethical actions, they may begin to justify their involvement in these actions, believing that they are not truly violating ethical standards. This self-rationalization further undermines self-discipline, as individuals convince themselves that their behavior is acceptable.
* About the endemic effects of corruption we refer to the article published in Brazil (March 2010) by National Association of Federal Public Attorneys, which its Attorney General of the Union Luís Inácio Adams acknowledged the issue of corruption in Brazil as an "endemic and permanent problem" (full text here).
Conclusion
Self-discipline is a critical factor in maintaining ethical behavior and resisting corrupt influences. However, the mere exposure effect poses a significant threat to self-discipline, particularly in environments where unethical practices are prevalent. Repeated exposure to unethical behavior can lead to moral desensitization, weakening individuals' self-regulation and increasing their likelihood of engaging in corruption. To protect against this, organizations must be aware of the potential dangers of repeated exposure to unethical actions and work to create environments that promote ethical behavior.
With that said, we can undoubtably state that education plays a crucial role in combating corruption and fostering self-discipline within individuals and society as a whole. By promoting critical thinking, ethical reasoning, and an understanding of civic responsibility, education helps individuals recognize and resist corrupt practices. It equips them with the knowledge and moral framework necessary to make principled decisions, even in challenging environments. Moreover, education enhances self-discipline by teaching individuals how to set goals, manage impulses, and uphold ethical standards, ultimately contributing to a more accountable and transparent society.
Carlos I. Filho
References
Baumeister, R. F., & Tierney, J. (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength. Penguin Press.
Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation, ego depletion, and motivation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00001.x
Darley, J. M. (2005). The cognitive and social psychology of contagious organizational corruption. Brooklyn Law Review, 70(4), 1177-1194.
Monin, B., & Miller, D. T. (2001). Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.33
Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848
Comments