We use a controlled laboratory experiment design to test rational choice theory on student whistleblowing. We examine reporting costs by comparing actual reporting behavior under anonymous and non-anonymous reporting channels. Reporting benefits are explored by considering the influence on reporting of group versus individual reward systems. We find that the type of reporting channel does not significantly influence student reporting behavior. Rewarding students based on group test scores results in significantly higher reporting rates compared to a system rewarding students based on individual test scores. Our laboratory research design allows for the measurement of actual reporting. The high reporting rates in this study emphasize the importance of clearly stating what is considered to be unethical behavior and directly asking students about their ethical environment.

By controlling for size and existence of a religious affiliation and gender, this study adds to the literature regarding opinions of undergraduate business students about the ethical nature of both academic and business related actions. Analysis of student survey data from two institutions similar in these characteristics continues in this longitudinal study. After the data were separated by gender, ethical perceptions of male students significantly differed for business-related dishonest acts for those male students who had taken two or more courses in religion, but church service attendance did not seem to have any effect. This may suggest that taking more courses (or having more dialogs) in which moral issues beyond academics are discussed may affect male student perceptions of ethical issues outside the institution.