See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328014246

Accountants' whistle-blowing intentions: the impact of affective

organisational commitment

Article  in  International Journal of Business Governance and Ethics · October 2018

DOI: 10.1504/IJBGE.2018.10016567

CITATIONS READS

0 210

4 authors, including:

Muhammet Sait Dinc Cemil Kuzey

The American University of the Middle East Murray State University
52 PUBLICATIONS   123 CITATIONS    57 PUBLICATIONS   915 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bedia Atalay

19 PUBLICATIONS   27 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Effect of Ethical Leadership, Job Satisfaction, Affective Organizational Commitment on Accountants' Turnover Intention View project

The determinants of carbon disclosure: evidence from Turkish companies View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammet Sait Dinc on 05 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Business Governance and Ethics, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2018 15

Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions: the impact

of affective organisational commitment

M. Sait Dinc*
Department of Management,
International Burch University,
Francuske revolucije bb. Ilidža 71210,
Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: [email protected]
*Corresponding author

Cemil Kuzey
Computer Science and Information Systems,
Arthur J. Bauernfeind College of Business,
Murray State University,
Murray, KY 42071, USA
Email: [email protected]

Ali Haydar Gungormus

Francuske revolucije bb. Ilidža,
Sarajevo, 71210, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: [email protected]

Bedia Atalay
Francuske revolucije bb. Ilidža,
Sarajevo, 71210, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Email: [email protected]

Abstract: Incidences of organisational wrongdoing have been widely spread

throughout the business world. Accounting professionals are the key human
resources who find evidence of wrongdoing in firms and have the opportunity
to report it. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between
affective organisational commitment of accountants and their whistle-blowing
preferences. Using the survey method, 177 responses were collected from
Turkish accountants. A partial least square structural equation model was
constructed to test both the reliability and validity of the measurement and the
structural model. The results showed that the accountants with higher affective
organisational commitment are more likely to prefer ‘whistle-blowing toward
internal structures’ to remain silent. Furthermore, it found a strong relationship
between ‘whistle-blowing toward outside agencies’ and ‘whistle-blowing with
an assumed name’. On the other hand, the study found a negative relationship
between affective organisational commitment and ‘whistle-blowing with an
assumed name’ and ‘whistle-blowing toward outside agencies’.

Copyright © 2018 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

16 M.S. Dinc et al.

Keywords: organisational commitment; whistle-blowing; whistle-blowing

modes; affective commitment; accounting professionals; PLS-SEM.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Dinc, M.S., Kuzey, C.,
Gungormus, A.H. and Atalay, B. (2018) ‘Accountants’ whistle-blowing
intentions: the impact of affective organisational commitment’, Int. J. Business
Governance and Ethics, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp.15–32.
Biographical notes: M. Sait Dinc is an Associate Professor of Management
and Lecturer at the Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, International
Burch University, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. He obtained his
Bachelor’s at the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Bogazici University, Istanbul,
Turkey. He continued his graduate studies in the Department of Management,
International Burch University. He finished his PhD at the Faculty of
Economics and Social Sciences, International Burch University. His output
includes a book, book chapter, and several articles on management, human
resource management, organisational behaviour and ethics in management and
numerous papers at national and international conferences.
Cemil Kuzey is an Associate Professor of Computer Information System at the
Murray State University. He has been teaching graduate and undergraduate
courses such as managerial decision making, business statistics, and data
analytics. He acquired his PhD in Business Administration through the
Department of Quantitative Analysis, Istanbul University, Turkey. Among his
academic pursuits, he took several graduate courses at the Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education, University of Toronto. His research interests are related
to operation research, data mining, structural equation modelling, and business
intelligence. His publications include articles in Decision Support Systems,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Expert Systems with Applications, Group
Decision and Negotiation, American Journal Of Business Education, European
Journal of Economic and Political Studies, International Journal of Culture,
Tourism and Hospitality Research, The International Journal Business in
Society, Journal of Administrative Sciences, Creativity and Innovation
Management, and two book chapters in Frontiers of Business, Management
and Economics.
Ali Haydar Gungormus worked as an Accountant from the Kütahya Porcelain
and Ceramic Industry Inc., Lecturer in the Department of Accounting at the
Dumlupınar University, and Assistant Professor in the Department of
Accounting and Finance at the Fatih University. He completed his PhD from
the Dumlupinar University. He has been teaching various courses in financial
accounting, cost accounting, management accounting, and financial statements
analysis. He has published his research articles in the Journal of Economic and
Social Research, Journal of Economic and Political Studies, Responsibility
Journal, published in international journals such as the Mediterranean Journal
of Social Sciences, and Dumlupinar University Journal of Social Science.
Bedia Atalay was a full-time Assistant Professor and Lecturer at the Faculty of
Banking and Insurance, Economics and Administrative Sciences, Fatih
University. She became the top student in her Bachelor’s degree at the Faculty
of Management, Dumlupinar University. She continued her graduate studies at
Accounting and Finance Division, Management Department, Business
Administration Faculty, Sakarya University. She obtained her PhD at the
Faculty of Business Administration, Sakarya University. Her work has been
published in many journals. Her research and teaching interests are
management accounting, cost accounting, ethics, forensic accounting,
environmental accounting, and auditing.
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 17

1 Introduction

Whistle-blowing, by well-known definition, is “the disclosure by organization members

(former or current) of illegal, immoral, or illegitimate practices under the control of their
employers, to persons or organizations that may be able to effect action” [Near and
Miceli, (1985), p.4]. Implied in this definition is that whistle-blowing can be viewed as
‘prosocial’ behaviour in which whistleblowers may call attention to organisational
wrongdoings so that as a result, solutions may be found (Dozier and Miceli, 1985).
However, whistle-blowing can be categorised as external or internal, formal or informal,
and identified or anonymous which depends upon where and how the complaint is
reported. For instance, whistleblowers report wrongdoing to a supervisor or another
authority within the organisation in internal whistle-blowing, whereas they prefer
reporting it to outside agencies in external whistle-blowing. Identified versus anonymous
whistle-blowing is based upon whether a whistleblower uses his or her real name in
reporting a wrongdoing, while formal versus informal is a whistle-blowing form in which
a whistleblower reports wrongdoing by following the standard organisational procedures
or personally speaking to close associates or superiors (Park et al., 2005).
While whistle-blowing can range from external or internal, formal or informal,
identified or anonymous, this article concentrates on internal, external, and anonymous
whistle-blowing. It also focuses on the relationship between organisational commitment
and the likelihood of the aforementioned whistle-blowing modes. According to Somers
and Casal (1994), whistle-blowing consists of three elements: a rational component
which depends upon perceived benefits and costs to whistleblowers, a prosocial
component, and a loyalty component which reflects the whistleblowers’ level of
commitment to their organisation. They also mentioned that while whistle-blowing
researchers have focused on the first two elements, there is little research exploring the
third element, that is, organisational commitment and whistle-blowing relationship.
Recent literature regarding whistle-blowing has been finding empirical support for this
relationship (Caillier, 2015; Alleyne et al., 2013). Furthermore, investigating the role of
affective commitment in influencing whistle-blowing is more important than
investigating other organisational commitment components, because whistle-blowing is a
type of prosocial behaviour (Dozier and Miceli, 1985). A meta-analytic analysis indicated
that affective commitment had the strongest impact on prosocial behaviours compared
with other components of commitment (Meyer et al., 2002). Consequently, it has been
the most studied organisational commitment component (Aven et al., 1993). This study
therefore examines whether employees’ affective commitments to the organisation
impacts their whistle-blowing modes.
In addition to exploring affective commitment and whistle-blowing relationships, this
study extends the literature by examining this relationship in a non-western country
context. Whistle-blowing literature has most often concentrated in the USA and Europe.
Actions taken by employees in non-western countries when wrongdoing has been
uncovered in their organisations have rarely been studied (Park et al., 2005; Dinc et al.,
2017). This study selects one of these non-western countries, Turkey, for context. In a
recent study which was conducted in Turkey, Nayir and Herzig (2012) mentioned that
openly complaining about ethical misconduct is not common in the Turkish milieu. In
this culture, the whistle-blowing preferences of employees who have affective
commitments to their organisation when they encounter a wrongdoing have mainly
18 M.S. Dinc et al.

attracted curiosity. The sample for this study is accountants, who are key human
resources, measuring and disclosing the financial information of organisations to the
public (Ferrell and Fraedrich, 2015). Thus, the purpose of this study is to examine the
impact of the whistle-blowing intentions of accountants in Turkey on their affective
organisational commitment.

2 Review of literature and hypotheses

2.1 Whistle-blowing and whistle-blowing modes

Whistle-blowing, in a more recent definition, is described as “a deliberate non-obligatory
act of disclosure, which gets onto public record and is made by a person who has or had
privileged access to data or information of an organisation, about non-trivial illegality or
other wrongdoing whether actual, suspected or anticipated which implicates and is under
the control of that organisation, to an external entity having potential to rectify the
wrongdoing” [Jubb, (1999), p.78]. In this definition, whistle-blowing includes six
elements: the act of disclosing damaging news; the whistleblower agent; the disclosure
subject; the target organisation held responsible; the disclosure recipient; and an outcome
of the disclosure (Jubb, 1999). This study is focused upon the whistleblower agent, who
can be very effective in revealing misconduct in organisations. Sweeney’s (2008)
statement that one-third of deviant cases were discovered through information from
whistleblowers, proves that this is so. However, there are two schools of thought which
consider whistleblowers. While the first school views a whistleblower as an individual
with the interest of the organisation and/or society at heart when blowing the whistle, the
second sees them as traitorous violators of organisational norms (Rothschild and Miethe
1999). The damaging effects created by the wrongdoings of organisations on financial
wellbeing in global business justify the approach of the first school and makes the
whistle-blowing act become a prosocial behaviour. Prosocial behaviour is positive social
behaviour which is intended to benefit other persons (Staub, 1978). Although
whistle-blowing can benefit whistleblowers personally, whistle-blowing can be viewed as
prosocial behaviour because it generally also will benefit persons or organisations other
than the whistleblowers (Dozier and Miceli, 1985) since whistleblowers’ main motivation
is to stop the wrongdoing by using channels.
On the other hand, the ways through which whistleblowers might report wrongdoings
have attracted attention in whistle-blowing literature (Park and Blenkinsopp, 2009; Grant,
2002). As can be noticed in Near and Miceli’s (1985) and Jubb’s (1999) definitions,
previous whistle-blowing studies have largely divided it into external or internal
whistle-blowing (Park et al. 2005). They have also pinpointed whistle-blowing as
between ‘identified’ versus ‘anonymous’ (Dworkin and Baucus, 1998; Grant, 2002). In a
more recent typology of whistle-blowing proposed by Park et al. (2008), another
dimension, formal versus informal, was added to the previous two whistle-blowing
modes. Formal whistle-blowing is an institutional form by which a whistleblower reports
wrongdoing while following standard organisational procedures; in informal
whistle-blowing, the whistleblower reports wrongdoing by personally approaching close
associates or superiors. Rohde-Liebenau (2006) categorised this mode as authorised
versus unauthorised whistle-blowing. Identified versus anonymous whistle-blowing is
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 19

based upon whether a whistleblower uses his or her real name in reporting a wrongdoing.
At times, in the latter case, the whistleblower uses an assumed name. Internal versus
external whistle-blowing is related to which inside or outside authority to whom the
whistleblower provides information. According to studies focusing on whistle-blowing
modes, almost all whistleblowers attempt to report wrongdoing through internal channels
before using external channels (Miceli and Near, 1992, 2002). Despite the less
threatening characteristic of internal whistle-blowing to organisations, it is often not
welcomed. Whistleblower reports about wrongdoing are frequently ignored (Miceli et al.,
1991). However, whistleblowers are likely to prefer external channels rather than making
an internal report (Gao et al., 2015), especially when they observe the wrongdoing is
continuing. Because external whistle-blowing often attracts media attention which can
damage organisational image and reputation (Chen and Lai, 2014), it may be considered
threatening and often triggers retaliation (Dworkin and Baucus, 1998). In a nutshell, in
spite of fear of retaliation, employees in organisations have three options when
encountering a wrongdoing within an organisation:
1 to exit the organisation
2 voice discontent (i.e., blow the whistle)
3 remain silent.
Individuals who show a higher organisational commitment are more invested in staying
with the organisation, therefore are more likely to blow the whistle rather than exit the
organisation (Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran, 2005).
Although there are six whistle-blowing modes, internal, external, and anonymous
types of whistle-blowing are the focus of this article, for several reasons. First, it was
selected so as to remain consistent with prior studies that examined whistle-blowing
modes in Turkey (see Nayir and Herzig, 2012). Secondly, and most importantly,
whistle-blowing is perceived as a negative act in Turkey where this study was conducted.
Openly complaining about ethical misconduct has not been common in this country. This
observation was proven through evidencing from The Global Corruption Barometer
Report published by Transparency International (2009), which demonstrates that many
individuals do not lodge formal complaints out of fear of potential harassment and
retaliation (Nayir and Herzig, 2012). When they blow the whistle, they prefer internal to
external reporting in general (Park et al., 2008; Dinc et al., 2018). These whistleblowers
primarily prefer external whistle-blowing ways when internal complaint mechanisms
seem to have failed. They also report wrongdoings anonymously (Celep and Konakli,
2012; Dinc et al., 2017).

2.2 Organisational commitment and whistle-blowing

Organisational commitment is defined as the relative strength of an individual’s
identification with and involvement in a particular organisation [Mowday et al., (1982),
p.27]. Employees who are committed to their firms have a tendency to accept
organisational goals and values and have the will to make a considerable effort on behalf
of the organisations since they wish to stay in their organisation (Porter et al., 1974).
There are various models aiming to explain the dimensions of organisational
20 M.S. Dinc et al.

commitment. The three-component model developed by Meyer and Allen (1991) is well
known. According to this model, the three components of organisational commitment
are: affective commitment (emotional attachment to the organisation), continuance
commitment (willingness to be a part of the organisation), and normative commitment (a
feeling of obligation to continue employment). In a recent definition of affective
commitment, it is an “emotional attachment to the organization characterized by
acceptance of the organization’s culture and primary values and by willingness to remain
with the organization” [Park and Rainey, (2007), p.199].
With respect to organisational commitment and the whistle-blowing relationship, two
different views have been hypothesised in the literature. In the first view, since
committed employees, named as ‘organisation men’, perceive whistle-blowing action as
too risky and do not want to face a potential harm to themselves a negative relationship
between organisational commitment and whistle-blowing was hypothesised. In contrast
to the first view, the second states that commitment increases the likelihood of
whistle-blowing. Because wrongdoing damages the entire organisation, committed
employees who are characterised as ‘reformers’ try to put an end to it to show their
loyalty and to protect their organisation by blowing the whistle (Somers and Casal,
1994). Recent studies in the whistle-blowing literature find support for the second view
(Taylor and Curtis, 2010). For example, Mesmer-Magnus and Viswesvaran (2005) in a
meta-analytic study of whistle-blowing suggested organisational commitment is
positively related to whistle-blowing intention. In another study, Caillier (2012–2013)
found that organisational commitment was the most important predictor of employees’
whistle-blowing intention in federal agencies. However, only a small area of research has
concentrated upon the relationship between organisational commitment and
whistle-blowing modes. For instance, Sims and Keenan (1998) proposed that externally
blowing the whistle is positively associated with organisational commitment. In
accounting setting, Alleyne (2016) also found that organisational commitment
significantly influences internal and external whistle-blowing intentions. Another study
found that organisational commitment has a moderated mediation effect between moral
intensity, internal and external whistle-blowing intention and behaviour (Chen and Lai,
2014). Moreover, Miceli et al. (1991) found a direct positive effect of organisational
commitment on all types of whistle-blowing. Caillier (2015) studied local, state, and
federal government employees in the USA and found the mediating effect of affective
commitment in the relationship between transformational leadership and internal
whistle-blowing. However, several studies demonstrate that employees in the accounting
profession show a general reluctance to report wrongdoing (Brennan and Kelly, 2007;
Alleyne, 2010). But, Shawver and Clements (2006) argue that more research is needed to
test for the effect of organisational commitment on accountants’ whistle-blowing
intentions. Based on the previous literature discussed above, the following hypotheses are
posited:
Hypothesis 1 Individuals with higher affective commitment are more likely to
whistle-blow internally.
Hypothesis 2 Individuals with higher affective commitment are more likely to
whistle-blow externally.
Hypothesis 3 Individuals with higher affective commitment are more likely to
whistle-blow anonymously.
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 21

Hypothesis 4 Individuals with higher affective commitment are more likely to

whistle-blow.

3 Research methodology

The authors set accountants working in the firms in Istanbul as the target population since
a large percentage of the firms are located in Istanbul. It is anticipated that examining
these firms would be a well representative of firms in Turkey. Thus, firms operating in
Istanbul were included as the sample of this study. To consider the convenience and
efficiency of the sampling, the study employed convenience sampling of non-probability.
Three letters were used in data collection process. First, all participants were informed
about the nature of this study through an initial letter sent by the researchers to the
non-governmental business organisations where the contact information of the firms was
collected from. This letter informed that a study was being done on whistle-blowing in
their current organisations and their cooperation was required. Respondents were
reassured that the results would be completely anonymous. A second letter was sent to
top management in each organisation and copied to the selected accounting staff in the
same organisation after the specific organisations were chosen. It requested permission
for the specific accounting staff to respond to the questionnaires. This procedure was
done to protect the organisation and the individual, given that sensitive and potentially
damaging information may be found about the organisation. Third, the questionnaires,
together with a separate third letter and a self-addressed and stamped envelope, were sent
to senior level accountants in these organisations for them to complete and return to the
researchers. The survey questions included demographic variables as well as the research
variables such as internal whistle-blowing, external whistle-blowing, anonymous whistle-
blowing, no whistle-blowing, and affective commitment. The data were collected via an
online survey. In total, 500 firms were contacted, out of which 177 responded, resulted in
a response rate of 35.4%.
In order to test the hypothetical relationship, we employed partial least square-based
structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). The proposed model and the corresponding
hypothetical associations are shown in Figure 1. Multiple items from prior studies were
adapted from English language resources. In addition, 5-point Likert scales were utilised
in order to assess the items. Accordingly, ‘strongly agree’ was denoted by 5 while
‘strongly disagree’ was denoted by 1.

3.1 Preprocessing of the data

Preprocessing of the data is important before the testing a hypothesis. In this case, we
screened the data by assessing the missing data, imputed, and checked the univariate as
well as multivariate outlier values, normality, linearity and investigated any unengaged
respondents. A missing data analysis was performed. The Little’s MCAR test results
showed that the missing data were random (χ2 = 25.46; df: 33; sig. = .82). The missing
data was imputed using linear regression as the model for scale variable. Moreover, the
collinearity analysis showed no significantly high correlation among the independent
variables since the variance inflation factor (VIF) scores ranged between 1.17 and 1.36,
which are significantly lower than the threshold value of 10 (Hair et al. 2010).
22 M.S. Dinc et al.

Figure 1 Proposed research model

3.2 Sample

Affective commitment was modified from Meyer and Allen (1997). It was assessed using
five items, however, one item was eliminated due to its low PLS-based factor loading.
These four items were: I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this
organisation; I really feel as if this organisation’s problems are my own; I do not feel
‘emotionally attached’ to this organisation (reverse coded); I do not feel like ‘part of the
family’ at my organisation (reverse coded). The Cronbach’s alpha was .88.
Internal whistle-blowing was adapted from Celep and Konakli (2012). Seven items
were subject to the PLS-based factor; four were eliminated due to their respective low
factor loadings. Thus, three items were used for assessment. The items were: I would
report it to my immediate supervisor; I would report it to an upper level of management
in the organisation; I would use the official reporting channels inside of the organisation.
The Cronbach’s alpha was calculated as .75.
External whistle-blowing was modified from Celep and Konakli (2012). Four items
were subject to the analysis; two were not included in the final analysis since they had
low factor loadings. These two items were: I would disclose it by going public; I would
report it to the appropriate authorities outside of the organisation. The Cronbach’s alpha
was .80.
Anonymous whistle-blowing was adapted from Celep and Konakli (2012). They
adapted these three constructs from Park et al. (2005, 2008). Out of four items which
were subject to the PLS-based factor analysis, two were included in the final analysis.
The items were: I would report it using an assumed name; I would report the wrongdoing
but does not give any information about myself. The Cronbach’s alpha was calculated as
.76.
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 23

Table 1 Frequency analysis

Variables Frequency Percent

Gender Female 37 20.90
Male 140 79.10
Total 177 100.00
Marital Single 27 15.30
status Married 148 83.60
Total 177 100.00
Age 20-25 2 1.10
(in years) 26–30 13 7.30
31–40 64 36.20
41–50 72 40.70
51 + 26 14.70
Total 177 100.00
Education High school 6 3.40
College 3 1.70
Undergraduate 123 69.50
Master’s degree 41 23.20
Doctorate 4 2.30
Total 177 100.00
Experience 1-5 12 6.80
(in years) 6-10 19 10.70
11-15 43 24.30
16-20 29 16.40
21-25 39 22.00
26 + 35 19.80
Total 177 100.00
Title Accounting internship 13 7.30
CPA 123 69.50
CPA, Independent Auditor 29 16.40
Chartered Accountant 5 2.80
Independent Auditor 6 3.40
Academician 1 0.60
Total 177 100.00
Monthly 1,300–2,000 17 9.60
income 2,001–3,000 21 11.90
(TRY)
3,001–4,000 44 24.90
4,001–5,000 21 11.90
5,001 + 74 41.80
Total 177 100.00
24 M.S. Dinc et al.

Finally, no whistle-blowing was adapted from Tak (2010). Two items which were ‘I
would remain silent about the wrongdoing’ and ‘I would pretend no to see it’ were
included in the final analysis with a Cronbach’s alpha of .76.
The samples size was 177 after preprocessing steps. The frequency analysis results
are shown in Table 1. The results indicated that 79% of the participants were male, that
83.4% were married, that almost 41% were between 41 and 50 years old, that
approximately 70% held undergraduate diplomas, that 24.3% had work experience
ranging between 11 and 15 years, that almost 70% were chartered public accountants,
and that approximately 25% had a monthly income between 3001 TRY and 4000 TRY.

3.3 Measurement model

x Factor loadings: Table 2 shows the factor loading of the constructs based on the PLS
approach. Initially 22 items were subject to analysis, and nine items with factor
loadings below .7 were eliminated as recommended by Chin (1998). The final
number of items was 13. Thus, individual item reliability was assessed since all the
item loadings were above .70 (Chin, 1998). The proposed model included five
factors such as affective commitment, internal whistle-blowing, external
whistle-blowing, anonymous whistle-blowing, and No whistle-blowing. Factor
loadings ranged between .70 and .99. The value of the items loaded under the
particular factors was higher than the cross-loading values along the row level as
well as the column level.
x Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA): The constructs were subject to a further CFA
analysis. The five factors were included in a single model in order to examine the
construct reliability, validity, and the model fit of the proposed research model
recommended by Fornel and Larcker (1981). The CFA analysis with maximum
likelihood approach revealed a good fit (Table 3). Chi-square/df was 2.30, the
goodness of fit index was .91, the adjusted goodness of fit index was .84, the
comparative fit index was .93, the incremental fit index was .93, the Tucker-Lewis
index was .90, the root mean square error of approximation was .04, and the
standardised root mean square residual was .05. The fit indices met the threshold
values recommended by Bagozzi and Yi (1988), and Hu and Bentler (1999).
Therefore, the model fit was satisfied.
x Measurement model: The reflective indicator approach was employed in order to
establish the association between the latent variable and its indicators. In the
reflective approach, dropping an item from the analysis has no impact upon the
construct; the correlation between the latent variable and the individual indicators is
very high, and variation in the construct causes variation in the item measured
(Podsakoff et al., 2003).
The reliability and validity of the measurement model were examined. Table 4 shows
the correlation coefficients, descriptive statistics, the average variance extracted
(AVE) values, composite reliability, and the square root of AVE value at the
diagonal of the matrix of each latent variable in order to investigate the internal
consistency, reliability, and construct validity (Hair et al., 2010). Cronbach’s alpha
and composite reliability are used for assessing construct reliability. Composite
reliability ranged between .84 and .92 while Cronbach’s alpha ranged between .75
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 25

and .88, both of which are above the cut-off value of .70 (Nunnally and Bernstein,
1994). The construct validity was assessed via convergent and discriminant validity.
Factor loadings, AVE, and communalities demonstrated the convergent validity. The
factor loadings were all greater than the cut-off value of 0.70. AVE values as well as
the communalities ranged between 0.66 and 0.80, both far above the threshold value
of 0.50. Thus, the convergent validity was satisfied. The discriminant validity was
demonstrated using the square root of the AVE values, which should be greater than
any of the inter-construct correlations. The results indicated that the square root of
AVE values on the diagonal of the correlation matrix was greater than the
inter-correlation. Thus, the discriminant validity was satisfied.
Table 2 Factor loadings of the measurement model

Affective Internal External Anonymous No

Items
commitment whistle-blowing whistle-blowing whistle-blowing whistle-blowing
AC1 0.75 0.21 –0.07 –0.19 –0.03
AC2 0.90 0.30 –0.19 –0.33 –0.13
AC3 0.91 0.23 –0.12 –0.19 –0.09
AC5 0.85 0.29 –0.02 –0.16 –0.12
IW3 0.18 0.71 0.00 –0.13 –0.25
IW6 0.24 0.84 0.01 –0.14 –0.31
IW7 0.31 0.88 0.11 –0.04 –0.39
EW2 –0.05 0.11 0.81 0.39 –0.21
EW4 –0.14 0.04 0.98 0.49 –0.19
AW2 –0.04 0.08 0.38 0.70 –0.23
AW4 –0.28 –0.14 0.49 0.99 –0.07
NWB1 –0.04 –0.32 –0.30 –0.19 0.75
NWB2 –0.13 –0.38 –0.17 –0.05 0.98

Table 3 Confirmatory factor analysis

Latent variable Item Standardised regression weight t-value

Affective AC5 0.77 Scaling
commitment AC3 0.89 12.12
AC2 0.89 12.12
AC1 0.67 9.29
Internal IW7 0.80 Scaling
whistle-blowing IW6 0.74 7.92
IW3 0.59 6.79
External EW4 0.89 Scaling
whistle-blowing EW2 0.71 5.24
Anonymous AW4 0.88 Scaling
whistle-blowing AW2 0.71 3.07
No whistle-blowing WBC2 0.74 Scaling
WBC1 0.83 6.09
Notes: χ2(df = 53) = 121.76, p < .001; χ2/df = 2.30; GFI = .91; AGFI = .84; NFI = .90;
CFI = .93; RFI = .88; IFI = .93; TLI = .90; RMSEA = .04; SRMR = .05.
26 M.S. Dinc et al.

Table 4 Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis and reliability measures of the variables
(N = 177)

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5
Affective commitment 4.09 0.95 0.86
Internal whistle-blowing 4.29 0.96 .305** 0.82
External whistle-blowing 2.05 1.31 –0.13 0.06 0.90
Anonymous 1.87 1.21 –.266** –0.12 .500** 0.85
whistle-blowing
No whistle-blowing 1.78 1.12 –0.12 –.397** –.214** –0.09 0.87
Average variance 0.73 0.66 0.80 0.73 0.76
extracted (AVE)
Composite reliability 0.92 0.85 0.89 0.84 0.86
Communality 0.73 0.66 0.80 0.73 0.76
Cronbach’s alpha 0.88 0.75 0.80 0.76 0.76
Notes: The elements on the diagonal are the square root of AVE, while the elements on
the off-diagonals are the correlations between latent variables; **p < .01.

3.4 Structural equation modelling

The PLS-SEM approach was used in order to test hypothetical associations. PLS-SEM is
a covariance-based structural equation modelling technique. Smart PLS v.2 with the
bootstrapping resampling method was employed for testing the statistical significance of
the relationships (Ringle et al., 2005). In order to generate t-statistics and find the
standard errors for determining the coefficients, bootstrapping with a recommended value
of 5,000 resamples was used (Henseler et al., 2009).

Figure 2 The results of the structural model

 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 27

The direct hypothetical relationships based on PLS-SEM results are provided in Table 5
and Figure 2. The results indicated that there is a statistically significant positive
association between affective commitment and internal whistle-blowing (E = .306,
p < .01). In addition, affective commitment has a statistically significantly negative
impact on external whistle-blowing (E = –.131, p < .05), anonymous whistle-blowing
(E = –.265, p < .01), and No whistle-blowing (E = –.136, p < .10). Based on PLS-SEM
results, H1 was supported, whereas H2, H3, and H4 were not.
Table 5 Structural equation modelling results

Hypothesis Path Beta T-stat. Results

H1 Affective → Internal 0.306*** 3.29 Supported
commitment whistle-blowing
H2 Affective → External –0.131** 2.08 Not
commitment whistle-blowing supported
H3 Affective → Anonymous –0.265*** 3.94 Not
commitment whistle-blowing supported
H4 Affective → No –0.136* 1.75 Not
commitment whistle-blowing supported
Notes: *p < .10; **p < .05; ***p < .01.
According to Chin (1998), assessment of predictive relevance, explanatory power and
predictive powers are critically inherent in PLS-SEM analysis. The explained variance
(R2) as well as the predictive relevance (Q2) are provided in Table 6. The value of the
explained variance (R2) demonstrates the explanatory power of a structural equation
model. Chin (1998) classified the value of R2 for endogenous latent variables as 0.67
(substantial), 0.33 (moderate), and 0.19 (weak). The R2 values were used to show the
explained variance by the independent latent variables. The value of R2 was classified as
substantial (> .26), moderate (between .13 and .26), and weak (< .13). Based on this
criteria, internal whistle-blowing (R2 = .09), external whistle-blowing (R2 = .09),
anonymous whistle-blowing (R2 = .07), and no whistle-blowing (R2 = .01) had weak
explanatory power.
Table 6 Predictive power and relevance of the endogenous latent variables

Endogenous latent variables R2 Q2

Internal whistle-blowing 0.09 0.06
External whistle-blowing 0.02 0.01
Anonymous whistle-blowing 0.07 0.03
No whistle-blowing 0.01 0.01

The predictive relevance was evaluated using the Q2 test (Stone, 1974; Geisser, 1975).
This demonstrates the measure of a model fit, showing how well the model and its
parameter (Chin, 1998) reconstruct observed values. Smart PLS v.2 was utilised in order
to obtain the value of Q2 by blindfolding one case at a time and then re-estimating the
model parameters using the remaining cases, then finally predicting the omitted case
values based on the remaining parameters (Sellin and Versand, 1989). The endogenous
variables with positive Q2 were considered to have a predictive relevance while the
negative Q2 was considered to have an absence of predictive relevance. The predictive
28 M.S. Dinc et al.

relevance values of the endogenous latent variables are shown in Table 6, and are well
above zero. Thus, the values of Q2 indicated predictive relevance for internal
whistle-blowing, external whistle-blowing, anonymous whistle-blowing, and no
whistle-blowing.

4 Discussions and conclusions

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the affective
commitment of accountants and their preferences for whistle-blowing modes. The
implications of the study are highlighted in the following paragraphs.
First implication of this study is that it finds support for organisational commitment
and the whistle-blowing intention relationship. Although there have been many studies
focusing on this relationship, a very limited number of researchers have investigated the
relationship between affective commitment and whistle-blowing modes. This study
shows that employees who have an emotional attachment to an organisation feel that it is
their duty to report unlawful acts (Brewer and Selden, 1998) because they believe that,
with this prosocial behaviour, they can protect the organisation from a damaging situation
(Near and Miceli, 1985). In other words, these employees believe that they show their
commitment to their organisation by reporting wrongdoing. In this whistle-blowing, they
prefer internal channels. This finding is consistent with previous research about
whistle-blowing, which suggests that organisational commitment increases the likelihood
of whistle-blowing (Dozier and Miceli, 1985; Somers and Casal, 1994; Street, 1995) and
that nearly all whistleblowers initially attempt to report wrongdoing via internal channels
before using external channels (Miceli and Near, 1992, 2002).
The study analysis also revealed that there is a strong relationship between the
external and anonymous whistle-blowing intentions of the accountants. As a second
implication, the study demonstrated that whistleblowers are generally reluctant to report
organisational wrongdoings to external channels and that if they intended to blow the
whistle, they would do so anonymously. This finding is consistent with the recent
literature which also found a strong relationship between external and anonymous
whistle-blowing and suggested that whistle-blowing in Turkey is often viewed as risky
for individuals (Nayir and Herzig, 2012). In addition, whistle-blowing research also
supports the finding that when whistleblowers report wrongdoing via external channels,
they are more likely to receive retaliation which can be more severe than when internal
ways are used. For this reason, they remain anonymous when whistle-blowing (Near and
Miceli, 1986).
In contrast to the suggestion in the literature (Sims and Keenan, 1998), the research
findings showed no support for a positive relationship between affective commitment and
external and anonymous whistle-blowing. This study found negative relationships
between the aforementioned variables which may stem from the research context.
Whistle-blowing is perceived as a negative act in Turkey; complaining openly about an
ethical misconduct has not been common (Nayir and Herzig, 2012). Turkish idioms and
proverbs like “speech is silver but silence is gold” openly suggest that speaking could
create trouble for people (Köylüoğlu et al., 2015). However, recent research conducted in
Turkey shows that public trust in the judicial system has declined to 33% (Kaya, 2016).
In light of this information, it can be inferred that employees with higher affective
commitments in Turkey are not inclined to blow the whistle externally because they do
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 29

not believe that these channels can stop wrongdoing in organisations. Furthermore, they
use their real names in reporting wrongdoings internally. The findings of the few studies
which were conducted in Turkey support this, revealing a preference for internal over
external and identified over anonymous reporting in general (Nayir and Herzig, 2012;
Park et al., 2008).
There are several practical implications of the study. Accountants with higher
affective commitments often feel that disclosing wrongdoing shows their commitment in
that they are protecting the organisation from any damage and they therefore prefer
internal channels to external channels. They are more likely to use identified
whistle-blowing. These research findings suggest that organisations in Turkey should
seek ways to strengthen internal channels for whistleblowers. For example, they can
provide direct lines for their employees in the organisations. Organisations should also
believe that whistle-blowing is beneficial for them in the long run. Because of this,
whistleblower reports of wrongdoing should not be ignored by organisations, and
whistleblowers should not fear retaliation from any of the organisation, co-workers or
public. To protect whistleblowers, Turkish officials should solidify laws and regulations
outlining the rights of whistleblowers like the Whistleblower Protection Law in the USA
(e.g., the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002).
In conclusion, although organisational commitment and whistle-blowing have been
examined, research on the relationship between affective commitment and
whistle-blowing preferences is very scarce. Together with investigating this relationship,
this study was conducted using accounting professionals in a non-western country
context, Turkey. The study results reveal that accountants with higher affective
commitments are more apt to report wrongdoings by utilising internal ways.

4.1 Limitations and further research

This study has some limitations. First, the study was conducted in a single city of a
country setting in accounting firms. Therefore, it might be inappropriate to deduce
general conclusions from the study findings. Second, self-reported issues may be a
limitation in this sensitive study. The final limitation of this research is the insufficient
amount of literature. Future study should add other organisational commitment
components which are normative and continuance commitments with individual variables
such as job satisfaction to affective commitment and whistle-blowing modes.

References
Alleyne, P. (2010) The Influence of Individual, Situational and Team Factors on Auditors’
Whistleblowing Intentions, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Bradford, Bradford.
Alleyne, P. (2016) ‘The influence of organisational commitment and corporate ethical values on
non-public accountants’ whistleblowing intentions in Barbados’, Journal of Applied
Accounting Research, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp.190–210.
Alleyne, P., Hudaib, M. and Pike, R. (2013) ‘Towards a conceptual model of whistle-blowing
intentions among external auditors’, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp.10–23.
Aven, F.F., Parker, B. and McEvoy, G.M. (1993) ‘Gender and attitudinal commitment to
organizations: a meta-analysis’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.63–73.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988) ‘On the evaluation of structural equation models’, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp.74–94.
30 M.S. Dinc et al.

Brennan, N. and Kelly, J. (2007) ‘A study of whistle-blowing among trainee auditors’, British
Accounting Review, Vol. 39, No. 1, pp.61–87.
Brewer, G.A. and Selden, S.C. (1998) ‘Whistle blowers in the federal service: new evidence of the
public service ethic’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 8, No. 3,
pp.413–439.
Caillier, J.G. (2012–2013) ‘Agency retaliation against whistle-blowers: factors affecting employee
perceptions’, Public Integrity, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.29–49.
Caillier, J.G. (2015) ‘Transformational leadership and whistle-blowing attitudes: is this relationship
mediated by organizational commitment and public service motivation?’, The American
Review of Public Administration, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp.458–475.
Celep, C. and Konakli, T. (2012) ‘Bilgi Uçurma: Eğitim Örgütlerinde Etik ve Kural Dışı
Uygulamalara Yönelik Bir Tepki’, E-international Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 4,
No. 3, pp.65–88.
Chen, C.P. and Lai, C.T. (2014) ‘To blow or not to blow the whistle: the effects of potential harm,
social pressure and organizational commitment on whistleblowing intention and behavior’,
Business Ethics: A European Review, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp.327–342.
Chin W.W. (1988) ‘The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling’, in
Marcoulides, G.A. (Ed.): Modern Methods for Business Research, pp.295–336, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Dinc, M.S., Kuzey, C., Gungormus, A.H. and Atalay, B. (2017) ‘How do accounting professionals
perceive whistleblowing reasons and whistleblowing preferences?’, International Conference
on Applied Statistics and Econometrics in Tirana, Albania, pp.92–104.
Dinc, M.S., Kuzey, C., Gungormus, A.H. and Atalay, B. (2018) ‘Exploring predictors of internal,
external and anonymous whistle-blowing intentions: a quantitative analysis of accounting
professionals’, International Journal of Applied Statistics and Econometrics, Vol. 1, No. 1,
pp.18–29.
Dozier, J.B. and Miceli, M.P. (1985) ‘Potential predictors of whistle-blowing: a prosocial behavior
perspective’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.823–836.
Dworkin, T.M. and Baucus, M.S. (1998) ‘Internal vs. external whistleblowers: a comparison of
whistleblowing processes’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 12, pp.1281–1298.
Ferrell, O.C. and Fraedrich, J. (2015) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases, Nelson
Education, Toronto.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981) ‘Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp.39–50.
Gao, J., Greenberg, R. and Wong-On-Wing, B. (2015) ‘Whistleblowing intentions of lower-level
employees: the effect of reporting channel, bystanders, and wrongdoer power status’, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 126, No. 1, pp.85–99.
Geisser, S. (1975) ‘The predictive sample reuse method with applications’, Journal of the American
Statistical Association, Vol. 70, No. 350, pp.320–328.
Grant, C. (2002) ‘Whistle blowers: saints of secular culture’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 39,
No. 4, pp.391–399.
Hair, J.F., Anderson Jr., R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (2010) Multivariate Data Analysis
with Readings, 7th En., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sinkovics, R.R. (2009) The Use of Partial Least Squares Path
Modeling in International Marketing, pp.277–319, Sinkovics, R.R. and Pn, G. (Eds.),
Emerald, Bingley.
Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999) ‘Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives’, Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.1–55.
Jubb, P. (1999) ‘Whistle-blowing: a restrictive definition and interpretation’, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.77–94.
 Accountants’ whistle-blowing intentions 31

Kaya, E. (2016) Public Trust in Judicial System in Turkey (Turkiye’de Adaletin Bittiginin Resmidir)
[online] http://odatv.com/turkiyede-adaletin-bittiginin-resmidir-0811161200.html (accessed 8
October 2017).
Köylüoğlu, A.S., Bedük, A., Duman, L. and Büyükbayraktar, H.H. (2015) ‘Analyzing the relation
between teachers’ organizational silence perception and whistle blowing perception’,
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 207, pp.536–545.
Mesmer-Magnus, J.R. and Viswesvaran, C. (2005) ‘Whistleblowing in organizations: an
examination of correlates of whistleblowing intentions, actions, and retaliation’, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 62, No. 3, pp.277–297
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1991) ‘A three-component conceptualization of organizational
commitment’, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.61–89.
Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. (1997) Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and
Application, Sage, Thousand Oaks.
Meyer, J.P., Stanley, D.J., Herscovitch, L. and Topolnytsky, L. (2002) ‘Affective, continuance, and
normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences’, Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 61, No. 1, pp.20–52.
Miceli, M.P. and Near, J.P. (1992) Blowing the Whistle: The Organizational and Legal
Implications for Companies and Employees, Lexington, New York, NY.
Miceli, M.P. and Near, J.P. (2002) ‘What makes whistle-blowers effective? Three field studies’,
Human Relations, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp.455–479.
Miceli, M.P., Near, J.P. and Schwenk, C.R. (1991) ‘Who blows the whistle and why?’, Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp.113–130.
Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. (1982) Employee Organization Linkages: The
Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism and Turnover, Academic Press, New York, NY.
Nayir, Z.D. and Herzig, C. (2012) ‘Value orientations as determinants of preference for external
and anonymous whistleblowing’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 107, No. 2, pp.197–213.
Near, J.P. and Miceli, M.P. (1985) ‘Organizational dissidence: the case of whistleblowing’, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.1–16.
Near, J.P. and Miceli, M.P. (1986) ‘Retaliation against whistle blowers: predictors and effects’,
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp.137–145.
Nunnally, J. and Bernstein, I. (1994) Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Park, H. and Blenkinsopp, J. (2009) ‘Whistle-blowing as planned behavior – a survey of
South Korean police officers’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 85, No. 4, pp.545–556.
Park, H., Blenkinsopp, J., Öktem, M.K. and Omurgonulsen, U. (2008) ‘Cultural orientation and
attitudes toward different forms of whistleblowing: a comparison of South Korea, Turkey and
the U.K.’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 82, No. 4, pp.929–939.
Park, H., Rehg, M.H. and Lee, D. (2005) ‘The influence of Confucian ethics and collectivism on
whistleblowing intentions: a study of South Korean public employees’, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 58, No. 4, pp.387–403.
Park, S.M. and Rainey, H.G. (2007) ‘Antecedents, mediators, and consequences of affective,
normative, and continuance commitment: empirical tests of commitment effects in federal
agencies’, Review of Public Personnel Administration, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp.197–226.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003) ‘Common method biases
in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies’, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, No. 5, pp.879–903.
Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T. and Boulian, P.V. (1974) ‘Organizational commitment,
job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians’, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 59, No. 5, p.603.
Ringle, C., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005) Smart-PLS Version 2.0 M3, University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, Germany.
 32 M.S. Dinc et al.

Rohde-Liebenau, B. (2006) Whistleblowing Rules: Best practice; Assessment and Revision of Rules
Existing in EU Institutions, European Parliament, Brussels, IPOL/D/CONT/ST/2005_58.
Rothschild, J. and Miethe, T.D. (1999) ‘Whistle-blower disclosures and management retaliation’,
Work and Occupations, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.107–128.
Sellin, N. and Versand, O. (1989) ‘Partial least square modeling in research on educational
achievement’, in Bos, W. and Lehmann, R.H. (Eds.): Reflections on Educational Achievement,
Papers in Honour of T. Neville Postlethwaite, pp.256–267, Waxmann Munster, New York.
Shawver, T.J. and Clements, L.H. (2006) ‘The intention of accounting students to whistle-blow in
situations of questionable ethical dilemmas’, Research on Professional Responsibility and
Ethics in Accounting, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp.177–191.
Sims, R.L. and Keenan, J.P. (1998) ‘Predictors of external whistleblowing: organizational and
intrapersonal variables’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.411–421.
Somers, M.J. and Casal, J.S. (1994) ‘Organizational commitment and whistleblowing a test of the
reformer and the organization man hypothesis’, Group & Organizational Studies, Vol. 19,
No. 3, pp.270–284.
Staub, E. (1978) Positive Social Behavior and Morality: Social and Personal Influences, Vol. 1,
Academic Press, New York.
Stone, M. (1974) ‘Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions’, Journal of the
Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological), Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.111–147.
Street, M.D. (1995) ‘Cognitive moral development and organizational commitment: two potential
predictors of whistle-blowing’, Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 11, No. 4, p.104.
Sweeney, P. (2008) ‘Hotlines helpful for blowing the whistle’, Financial Executive, Vol. 24, No. 4,
pp.28–31.
Tak, B. (2010) Hastanelerde Hasta Güvenliğini Tehdit Eden Olayların Raporlanması: Türkiye,
Azerbaycan, Bosna, Arnavutluk, Lübnan ve Suriye’yi Kapsayan Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma,
Vol. 2, Sağlıkta Kaliteve Performans Kongresi, Antalya, Turkey.
Taylor, E.Z. and Curtis, M.B. (2010) ‘An examination of the layers of workplace influences in
ethical judgments: whistleblowing likelihood and perseverance in public accounting’, Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp.21–37.
Transparency International (2009) Global Corruption Barometer [online] http://www.transparency.
org/policy_research/surveys_indices/gcb/2009 (accessed 29 October 2010).

View publication stats