↓ Skip to main content

The Morning Morality Effect The Influence of Time of Day on Unethical Behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.), January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 3,100)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
42 news outlets
blogs
16 blogs
twitter
502 tweeters
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
weibo
1 weibo user
facebook
17 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Morning Morality Effect The Influence of Time of Day on Unethical Behavior
Published in
Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.), January 2013
DOI 10.1177/0956797613498099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maryam Kouchaki, Isaac H. Smith, Kouchaki M, Smith IH

Abstract

Are people more moral in the morning than in the afternoon? We propose that the normal, unremarkable experiences associated with everyday living can deplete one's capacity to resist moral temptations. In a series of four experiments, both undergraduate students and a sample of U.S. adults engaged in less unethical behavior (e.g., less lying and cheating) on tasks performed in the morning than on the same tasks performed in the afternoon. This morning morality effect was mediated by decreases in moral awareness and self-control in the afternoon. Furthermore, the effect of time of day on unethical behavior was found to be stronger for people with a lower propensity to morally disengage. These findings highlight a simple yet pervasive factor (i.e., the time of day) that has important implications for moral behavior.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 502 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 67%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 33%
Psychology 1 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 862. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,251
of 7,932,228 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.)
#8
of 3,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38
of 145,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Science (Sage Publications Inc.)
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,932,228 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,100 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 145,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.