The purpose of the article was to highlight and thoroughly analyze the psychological methods by which corrupt people deny, justify or reduce their own guilt and try to interpret their actions as normal and correct ones.

Research results. The article examines psychological techniques of justification (explanation) of corrupt behaviour. It is emphasized that unlike other types of crimes, corruption acts are usually committed by quite respectable and good people, who can be good parents, active members of the community, high officials, and who do not consider themselves as corrupted. One of the most important aspects of corruption is how the offenders defend or justify their actions using various concepts or mental techniques. These methods of justifying corrupt behaviour, which in various studies are called techniques of neutralization, rationalization, socialization, moral disengagement etc., became the subject of this scientific review. The neutralization of deviant behaviour is considered in the article as psychological techniques that help to completely or partially deny someone’s responsibility for deviant behaviour. It is noted that in order for there to be no or less guilt, neutralization can be carried out in two ways: on the one hand, by denying the deviant behaviour itself, and on the other hand, by denying responsibility for it.

Conclusions. The leading techniques of neutralization are singled out: disclaimer of responsibility; denial of harm; denial of the victim; condemnation of condemners; appeal to greater loyalty, etc.

Key words: responsibility, justification, denial of damage; condemnation, corruption, social norms.

References

1. Albercht, W. S., Albercht, C. O., Albercht, C. C., and Zimbelman, M. F. (2012), „Fraud Examination”, Fourth Edition, Cengage Learning Mason, Ohio.
2. Albrecht, C., Holland, D., Malagueno, R., Dolan, S., and Tzafrir, S. (2015), „The Role of Power in Financial Statement Fraud Schemes”, Journal of Business Ethics, рр. 803–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2019-1.
3. Anand, V., Ashforth, B. E., and Joshi, M. (2005), „Business as usual: The acceptance and perpetuation of corruption in organizations”, Academy of Management, Vol. 19, № 4, рр. 9–23. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2005.19417904.
4. Ashforth, B. E and Anand, V. (2003), „The Normalization of Corruption in Organizations”, Research in Organizational Behavior, рр. 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(03)25001-2.
5. Cressey, D. R. (1953), Other People’s Money: A Study of the Social Psychology of Embezzlement, Free Press, Glencoe.
6. Curasi, C. F. (2013), „The relative influences of neutralizing behavior and subcultural values on academic dishonesty”, Journal of Education for Business, № 88 (3), рр. 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2012.668145.
7. Fritsche, I. (2005), “Predicting Deviant Behavior by Neutralization: Myths and Findings”, Deviant Behavior, № 26 (5), рр. 483–510. https://doi.org/10.1080/016396290968489.
8. Hauser, C. (2018), Fighting Against Corruption: Does Anti-corruption training make any difference?, Journal of Business Ethics, № 159, рр. 281–299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3808-3.
9. Heath, J. (2008), “Business Ethics and Moral Motivation: A Criminological Perspective”, Journal of Business Ethics, № 83 (4), рр. 595–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9641-8.
10. Stuar, H. and Eaton, R. Degrees of Deviance: Student Accounts of Their Deviant Behavior, Sheffield Publishing Salem.
11. Sameer, H. (2007), “Neutralization Theory and Online Software Piracy: An Empirical Analysis”, Ethics and Information Technology, № 9 (3), рр. 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-007-9143-5.
12. Kaptein, M., and Helvoort, M. V. (2019), A Model of Neutralization Techniques, Deviant behavior, № 40 (10), рр. 1260–1285. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2018.1491696.
13. Klockars, C. (1974), The Professional Fence. Thirty Years of Wheelin’ and Dealin’ in Stolen Goods, Free Press, New York.
14. Maruna, S. and Copes, H. (2005), “What Have We Learned from Five Decades of Neutralization Research?”, Crime and Justice, рр. 221–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/655355.
15. McMillan, E. J. (2006), Preventing Fraud in Nonprofit Organization. Hoboken, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, Inc.
16. Mocan, N. (2008), What determines corruption? International evidence from microdata, Economic Inquiry, 46, рр. 493–510. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2007.00107.x.
17. Murphy, P. R., and Dacin, M. T. (2011), Psychological Pathway to Fraud: Understanding and Preventing Fraud in Organizations, Journal of Business Ethics, № 101 (4), рр. 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0741-0.
18. Padgett, S. (2015), Profiling the fraudster removing the mask to prevent and detect fraud, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, New Jersey. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118929773.
19. Rabl, T., and Kühlmann, T. M. (2009), Why or why not? Rationalizing corruption in organizations, Cross-Cultural Management, № 16(3), рр. 268–286. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527600910977355.
20. Ribeaud, D. and Eisner, M. (2010), “Are Moral Disengagement, Neutralization Techniques, and Self-Serving Cognitive Distortions the Same? Developing a Unified Scale of Moral Neutralization of Aggression”, International Journal of Conflict and Violence, № 4 (2), рр. 298–315.
21. Schlenker, B. R., Pontari B. A, and Christopher, A. N. (2001), “Excuses and Character: Personal and Social Implications of Excuses”, Personality and Social Psychology Review, № 5 (1), рр. 15–32. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0501_2.
22. Serviere-Munoz, L. And Mallin, M. L. (2013), “How Do Unethical Salespeople Sleep at Night? The Role of Neutralizations in the Justification of Unethical Sales Intentions”, Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, № 33 (3), рр. 289–306. https://doi.org/10.2753/PSS0885-3134330304.
23. Schönbach, P. (1990), Account Episodes. The Management or Escalation of Conflict, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
24. Shigihara, A. M. (2013), “It’s Only Stealing a Little a Lot: Techniques of Neutralization for Theft among Restaurant Workers”, Deviant Behavior, № 34 (6), рр. 494–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2012.748630.
25. Sykes, G. M. and Matza, D. (1957), Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency, American Sociological Review, № 22, рр. 664–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089195.
26. Tan, X., Liu, L., Zheng, W., and Huang, Z. (2016), Effects of social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism on corrupt intention: The role of moral outrage, International Journal of Psychology, № 51 (3), рр. 213–219. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12148.
27. Vona, L. W. (2011), The Fraud Audit: Responding to the risk of fraud in core business system, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New Jersey. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118387047.
28. Wang, F. and Sun, X. (2016), Absolute power leads to absolute corruption? Impact of power on corruption depending on the concepts of power one holds, European Journal of Social Psychology, № 46 (1), рр. 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2134.
29. Zhao, H., Zhang, H., and Xu, Y. (2016), Does the dark triad of personality predict corrupt intention? The mediating role of belief in good luck, Frontiers in Psychology, № 7, рр. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00608.