Demonstrating the equivalence of constructs is a key requirement for crosscultural\ud empirical research. The major purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how to\ud assess measurement and functional equivalence or invariance using the 9-item, 3-factor\ud Love of Money Scale (LOMS, a second-order factor model) and the 4-item, 1-factor Pay\ud Level Satisfaction Scale (PLSS, a first-order factor model) across 29 samples in six\ud continents (N = 5973). In step 1, we tested the configural, metric and scalar invariance\ud of the LOMS and 17 samples achieved measurement invariance. In step 2, we applied\ud the same procedures to the PLSS and nine samples achieved measurement invariance.\ud Five samples (Brazil, China, South Africa, Spain and the USA) passed the measurement\ud invariance criteria for both measures. In step 3, we found that for these two measures,\ud common method variance was non-significant. In step 4, we tested the functional\ud equivalence between the Love of Money Scale and Pay Level Satisfaction Scale. We\ud achieved functional equivalence for these two scales in all five samples. The results of\ud this study suggest the critical importance of evaluating and establishing measurement\ud equivalence in cross-cultural studies. Suggestions for remedying measurement nonequivalence\ud are offered

Monetary intelligence theory asserts that individuals apply their money attitude to frame critical concerns in the context and strategically select certain options to achieve financial goals and ultimate happiness. This study explores the dark side of monetary Intelligence and behavioral economics-dishonesty (corruption). Dishonesty, a risky prospect, involves cost-benefit analysis of self-interest. We frame good or bad barrels in the environmental context as a proxy of high or low probability of getting caught for dishonesty, respectively. We theorize: The magnitude and intensity of the relationship between love of money and dishonest prospect (dishonesty) may reveal how individuals frame dishonesty in the context of two levels of subjective norm-perceived corporate ethical values at the micro-level (CEV, Level 1) and Corruption Perceptions Index at the macro-level (CPI, Level 2), collected from multiple sources. Based on 6382 managers in 31 geopolitical entities across six continents, our cross-level three-way interaction effect illustrates: As expected, managers in good barrels (high CEV/high CPI), mixed barrels (low CEV/high CPI or high CEV/low CPI), and bad barrels (low CEV/low CPI) display low, medium, and high magnitude of dishonesty, respectively. With high CEV, the intensity is the same across cultures. With low CEV, the intensity of dishonesty is the highest in high CPI entities (risk seeking of high probability)-the Enron Effect, but thelowest in low CPI entities (risk aversion of low probability). CPI has a strong impact on the magnitude of dishonesty, whereas CEV has a strong impact on the intensity of dishonesty. We demonstrate dishonesty in light of monetary values and two frames of social norm, revealing critical implications to the field of behavioral economics and business ethics.

Monetary Intelligence theory asserts that individuals apply their money attitude to frame critical concerns in the context and strategically select certain options to achieve financial goals and ultimate happiness. This study explores the bright side of Monetary Intelligence and behavioral economics, frames money attitude in the context of pay and life satisfaction, and controls money at the macro-level (GDP per capita) and micro-level (Z income). We theorize:Managers with low love of money motive but high stewardship behavior will have high subjective well-being: pay satisfaction and quality of life. Data collected from 6586 managers in 32 cultures across six continents support our

No abstract

No abstract