ساختار هنجار صداقت با دولت در مشهد مورد مطالعه: راستگويي در ارائه اطلاعات درآمدي

The Structure of Honesty Norm in Mashhad A Case Study: Honesty in Income Information Submission to the State

يكي از عرصه‌هاي مهم كنش كه مسأله عمده آن، بي‌صداقتي و عدم توافق بر سر هنجار صداقت است، عرصه ارتباط شهروندان با دولت در ارائه اطلاعات درآمدي است. هدف نوشتار حاضر، برآورد ميزان وفاق هنجاري صداقت با دولت در مشهد و شناسايي ساختار اين توافق با دو مؤلفه موقعيت‌مندي و قطبيت است. نتايج پيمايش عاملي در نمونه‌اي تصادفي به تعداد 160 نفر از ساكنان مناطق مختلف شهر مشهد نشان مي‌دهد كه ساختار هنجار صداقت با دولت داراي قطبيت مثبت است و اكثريت پاسخگويان (65%) هنجار صداقت با دولت را به طور قوي يا ضعيف پذيرفته‌اند. در حالي كه قطبيت منفي در اين ساختار بسيار ضعيف است و تنها 5% پاسخگويان در موضع بي‌صداقتي كامل با دولت قرار گرفته‌اند. همچنين در ساختار هنجار صداقت با دولت، نوعي حالت دو قطبي ديده مي‌شود. ساختار هنجار صداقت با دولت تقريباً به طور كامل، مشروط و موقعيت‌مند است و در آن وقفه هنجاري وجود ندارد در نهايت در بين چهار وضعيت دوگانه‌اي كه پايبندي به هنجار صداقت با دولت را تحت تأثير قرار مي‌دهند (مجازات، افشا، منفعت و همنوايي)، تأثير مجازات (جريمه شدن) بيش از ساير خصوصيات وضعيتي است

IntroductionSocial order is considered as one of the first concerns of early sociologists and most of classic and modern sociologists have written about. According some works, social order and predictability in members of the societys interaction is based on common styles of thinking, feeling and behavior.  These common styles are known as social norms.  Norms like values are important elements of culture. Norms and values are transmitted through socialization and internalization. One of the most important norms is honesty. Honesty is the essential norm in the field of culture and endurance of cultural system of the society extremely depends on the honesty norm.In many social settings dishonesty is problematic. One of the critical fields of social action is the field of citizens and state interaction in income information submission which dishonesty is its main problem. Citizens honesty with the government is very important especially when the government needs some information for policy making and management purposes and equitable resource distribution. It is more crucial when there is not any integrated information system or it has low quality. In this condition, gathering some data related to needs, shortcomings or accumulation of resources in some fields requires accurate information provided and submitted by citizens. If the necessary information is related to economic activities of citizens for economic policy making, then honesty is more problematic.  This paper aims to estimate the amount of normative consensus in honesty with state in income information submission and its norm structure in conditionality and polarity.Material & MethodA Factorial survey design was conducted. This kind of survey is based on merging an experimental design and survey method. According to Rossi and Andersen (1982) factorial survey considers complexity of real world and conditions of real choices and peoples real judgments. Factorial survey uses vignettes which are some descriptions of situations with different characteristics as variables. Some scholars believe that factorial survey reduces the probability of distortion in answers or providing an idealized version of values by subjects. So, factorial survey reduces the bias in survey research. Statistical population included all 18 years old and up living in 13 urban districts of Mashhad. A sample including 160 residents of Mashhad were selected through multistage sampling (stratified and systematic sampling).  After conducting factorial survey, we used Rossi and Berk (1985) to analyze data. In the next step norm structure of honesty was described.Discussion of Results & ConclusionsResults indicated that (1) the norm structure of honesty with state has positive polarity and most of respondents (65%) have accepted the norm weakly or strongly. However, the negative consensus is very weak and merely 5% of respondents are dishonest with state. There is a polarity in the norm structure and about 30% of respondents are sometimes honest and sometimes dishonest. (2) The norm structure is almost completely conditional and 99.4% of respondents act conditionally. (3) In the norm structure there is not any lack of norm. There is no respondent in the sample wandering around the bounds of honesty and dishonesty. (4) Among four dual positions affecting adherence to the norm (punishment, disclosure, interest, conformity), the first one (punishment) more than other factors affects respondents norm adherence. Conditionality of honesty with state among majority of respondents in one hand, and salience of punishment impact on being honest with sate in other hand, implies that honesty with state is more derived from a sociopolitical restriction, than from a stable moral source or belief. So, its expected that the structure of honesty norm with state has a fragile and unstable nature.