Social Value Orientation On Corruption Prisoners

Agus Mulyana, Aulia Iskandarsyah, Ahmad Gimmy Prathama Siswadi, Wilis Srisayekti


Social value orientation is a psychological factor that can influence cooperative behavior. In social values orientation, the prosocial type promotes cooperation while proself type is not. A social dilemma is a situation where to be cooperative or not. Corruption behavior is one of the contexts of social dilemmas. Someone who commits corruption means he/she shows non-cooperative behavior. It is hypothesized that someone who commits corruption is a self-type social values orientation because he/she prioritizes personal interests and is not cooperative. This study aims to explore how social value orientation types on corruption prisoners. Data collection in this study used a questionnaire distributed to participants and interview. The study found that not all corruptors are proself types and focused on personal interest. Individuals of prosocial types who focus on common interests can also commit corruption. Corruption perpetrators believe that anyone who is in their position will commit corruption. There is another psychological aspect that can encourage someone to commit corruption.


corruption, social orientation, prisoners

Full Text:



Abidin, Z. and Siswadi, A. G. P. (2015). Psikologi Korupsi. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Attari, S. Z., Krantz, D. H., & Weber, E. U. (2014). Reasons for cooperation and defection in real-world social dilemmas. Judgment and Decision Making, 9(4), 316–334.

Attoma, J. D., Volintiru, C., & Malezieux, A. (2018). Gender , Social Value Orienta- tion , and Tax Compliance. CESifo Working Paper, No. 7372(November).

Balliet, D., Parks, C., & Joireman, J. (2009). Social value orientation and cooperation in social dilemmas: A meta-analysis. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 12(4), 533–547.

Chen, Y., Jiang, S., & Villeval, M. C. (2015). The Tragedy of Corruption Corruption as a social dilemma, (December 2015).

De Cremer, D., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2001). Why prosocials exhibit greater cooperation than proselfs: the roles of social responsibility and reciprocity. European Journal of Personality, 15(S1), S5–S18.

De Kwaadsteniet, E. W., Van Dijk, E., Wit, A., & De Cremer, D. (2006). Social dilemmas as strong versus weak situations: Social value orientations and tacit coordination under resource size uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(4), 509–516.

Eek, D., & Gärling, T. (2008). A new look at the theory of social value orientations: Prosocials neither maximize joint outcome nor minimize outcome differences but prefer equal outcomes. New Issues and Paradigms in Research on Social Dilemmas, 10–26.

Grosch, K., & Rau, H. A. (2017). Gender Differences in Honesty: The Role of Social Value Orientation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 62, 258–267.

Joireman, J. A., Van Lange, P. A. M., & Van Vugt, M. (2004). Who cares about the environmental impact of cars?: Those with an eye toward the future. Environment and Behavior, 36(2), 187–206.

Köbis, N. C., Van Prooijen, J. W., Righetti, F., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2015). “Who doesn’t?” - The impact of descriptive norms on corruption. PLoS ONE, 10(6).

Köbis, N. C., Van Prooijen, J. W., Righetti, F., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2016). Prospection in individual and interpersonal corruption dilemmas. Review of General Psychology, 20(1), 71–85.

Köbis, N. C., Van Prooijen, J. W., Righetti, F., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2017). The Road to Bribery and Corruption: Slippery Slope or Steep Cliff? Psychological Science, 28(3), 297–306.

Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. (2017). Laporan Tahunan 2016 Hingga Ke Bawah Permukaan, 1–266. Available at:

Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi. (2019). Rekapitulasi Tindak Pidana Korupsi. Avalaible at:

Li, Y., Yao, F. K., & Ahlstrom, D. (2014). The social dilemma of bribery in emerging economies: A dynamic model of emotion , social value , and institutional uncertainty. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(2), 311–334.

Pletzer, J. A. N. L., Balliet, D., Joireman, J., Kuhlman, D. M., & Voelpel, S. C. (2018). Social Value Orientation, Expectations, and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas: A Meta-analysis. European Journal of Personality, 32, 62–83.

Rosiana, D., Djunaidi, A., Setyono, I. L., & Srisayekti, W. (2018). Social Experience and Trust: Studies on Prisoners and non-Prisoners, 34(2), 351–358.

Sattler, D. N., & Kerr, N. L. (1991). Might Versus Morality Explored: Motivational and Cognitive Bases for Social Motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(5), 756–765.

Smeesters, D., Warlop, L., Van Avermaet, E., Corneille, O., & Yzerbyt, V. (2003). Do Not Prime Hawks with Doves: The Interplay of Construct Activation and Consistency of Social Value Orientation on Cooperative Behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 972–987.

Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., & Van Dijk, E. (2005). All is well that ends well, at least for proselfs: Emotional reactions to equality violation as a function of social value orientation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(6), 767–783.

Svensson, J. (2005). Eight Questions about Corruption. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(3), 19–42.

Transparency International. (2019). Corruption Perception Index 2018. Available at:

Van Lange, P. A. M., Bekkers, R., Schuyt, T. N. M., & Van Vugt, M. (2007). From games to giving: Social value orientation predicts donations to noble causes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(4), 375–384.

Van Lange, P. A. M., Joireman, J., Parks, C. D., & Van Dijk, E. (2013). The psychology of social dilemmas: A review. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120(2), 125–141.

Van Lange, P. A. M., Klapwijk, A., & Van Munster, L. M. (2011). How the shadow of the future might promote cooperation. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14(6), 857–870.

Van Lange, P. A. M., Otten, W., De Bruin, E. N. M., & Joireman, J. A. (1997). Development of prosocial, indivdualistic, and competitive orientations: Theory and preliminary evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(4), 273–292.

Van Prooijen, J. W., De Cremer, D., Van Beest, I., Ståhl, T., Dijke, M. van, & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2008). The egocentric nature of procedural justice: Social value orientation as moderator of reactions to decision-making procedures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1303–1315.

Wei, Z., Zhao, Z., & Zheng, Y. (2016). Moderating effects of social value orientation on the effect of social influence in prosocial decisions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–9.

Wibisono, S., Gusniarti, U., & Nurtjahjo, F. E. (2016). Pembelajaran kooperatif sebagai upaya meningkatkan motivasi, empati dan perilaku bekerjasama. SCHEMA - Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 1–10.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

MIMBAR : Jurnal Sosial dan Pembangunan is licensed under  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License