Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
A. Bandura, L. Reese, N. Adams (1982)
Microanalysis of action and fear arousal as a function of differential levels of perceived self-efficacy.Journal of personality and social psychology, 43 1
J. Braithwaite, T. Makkai (1991)
Testing an Expected Utility Model of Corporate DeterrenceLaw & Society Review, 25
L. Anderson, Ted Chiricos, G. Waldo (1977)
Formal and Informal Sanctions: A Comparison of Deterrent EffectsSocial Problems, 25
Raymond Er (1989)
DECISIONS TO PARTICIPATE IN AND DESIST FROM FOUR TYPES OF COMMON DELINQUENCY: DETERRENCE AND THE RATIONAL CHOICE PERSPECTIVELaw & Society Review, 23
W. Scott (1960)
Measures of Test HomogeneityEducational and Psychological Measurement, 20
D. Campbell, D. Fiske (1959)
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.Psychological bulletin, 56 2
J. Teevan (1976)
Subjective Perception of Deterrence (Continued)Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 13
E. Locke, Elizabeth Zubritzky, Cynthia Lee, P. Bobko (1984)
Effect of self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance.Journal of Applied Psychology, 69
Steven Klepper, D. Nagin (1989)
THE DETERRENT EFFECT OF PERCEIVED CERTAINTY AND SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT REVISITEDCriminology, 27
J. Rotter (1966)
Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement.Psychological monographs, 80 1
Scott Decker (1979)
Law and Society ReviewJournal of Drug Issues, 9
J. Collins (1985)
Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior
R. Mason, L. Calvin (1978)
A Study of Admitted Income Tax EvasionLaw & Society Review, 13
Loretta Stalans, Kent Smith, K. Kinsey (1989)
When Do We Think About Detection? Structural Opportunity and Taxpaying BehaviorLaw & Social Inquiry, 14
D. Bishop (1984)
Legal and Extralegal Barriers to DelinquencyCriminology, 22
A. Bandura (1985)
Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory
Harold Grasmick, R. Bursik (1990)
Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: Extending the deterrence model.Law & Society Review, 24
Irvin Brown, D. Inouye (1978)
Learned helplessness through modeling: The role of perceived similarity in competence.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36
Steven Klepper, D. Nagin (1989)
Tax Compliance and Perceptions of the Risks of Detection and Criminal ProsecutionLaw & Society Review, 23
D. Schunk (1984)
Self-Efficacy Perspective On Achievement BehaviorEducational Psychologist, 19
R. Paternoster, LeeAnn Iovanni (1986)
The Deterrent Effect of Perceived Severity: A ReexaminationSocial Forces, 64
A. Bandura, E. Blahard, B. Ritter (1969)
Relative efficacy of desensitization and modeling approaches for inducing behavioral, affective, and attitudinal changes.Journal of personality and social psychology, 13 3
G. Waldo, Ted Chiricos (1972)
Perceived Penal Sanction and Self-Reported Criminality: A Neglected Approach to Deterrence Research.Social Problems, 19
H. Lefcourt (1976)
Locus of control: Current trends in theory and research
Daniel Katz (1955)
Handbook of Social Psychology.Psychological Bulletin
Harold Grasmick, George Bryjak (1980)
The Deterrent Effect of Perceived Severity of PunishmentSocial Forces, 59
Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory is proposed as an alternative theoretical framework from which to view the role of managerial cognitions in determining corporate compliance with the law. A first test is made of the usefulness of the construct of managerial self-efficacy in predicting compliance. Data were drawn from interviews with 410 chief executives of small organizations. The predictive utility of self-efficacy is tested with three compliance measures: a self-assessed compliance measure, a government-assessed compliance measure taken at the same time as the self-efficacy measure, and a government-assessed compliance measure taken after a 2-year time lapse. After taking into account a number of significant background variables and making a distinction between self-efficacy beliefs and control beliefs, self-efficacy was found to be significantly related to compliance in all cases. The implications of these results for the regulatory process are discussed.
Law and Human Behavior – American Psychological Association
Published: Feb 1, 1994
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.