In a new cross-cultural study, researchers have uncovered striking differences in how Greeks and Germans respond to bribery in public services, especially when waiting in line. The findings offer insight into how social norms and cultural perceptions of corruption influence everyday behavior.
Led by Alexandros Karakostas of the ESSCA School of Management in Lyon, France, the study explored how individuals react when faced with the option to pay a bribe to jump ahead in a queue for public services. The experiment simulated realistic waiting scenarios and compared the responses of Greek and German participants.
Researchers designed a behavioral game known as the “queue-jumping game.” Participants could choose to bribe a public official to move up in line or pay a smaller bribe to protect their spot if someone else tried to cut ahead. These two actions were labeled as “queue-jumping” and “counter-bribing.”
In early rounds of the experiment, Greek participants were more likely to offer bribes, especially to jump ahead. German participants, in contrast, engaged in bribery less frequently at the start. Over time, however, these differences narrowed as both groups adapted their strategies through repeated interactions.
The results suggest that while cultural background plays a role in how people view and engage in bribery, behavior can shift with experience. Initial behavior was shaped by culture, but repeated exposure led to more strategic decision-making, the researchers noted.
One of the key findings was that participants felt more moral discomfort when offering a bribe to move ahead in line than when paying to protect their position. This applied to both Greeks and Germans. Still, the data showed that Greek participants felt more uncomfortable with the idea of paying to protect their position than Germans did.
That discomfort, researchers say, helps explain why Greek participants were quicker to engage in queue-jumping. If they already felt uneasy about trying to defend their position with a counter-bribe, many chose to act first and jump the line instead.
The experiment was carried out in both monocultural and intercultural groups. In the monocultural sessions, all participants were either Greek or German. In intercultural sessions, one participant belonged to a different nationality from the others. The researchers wanted to see if people would adjust their behavior to match the social norms of the majority group.
The results showed some shifts, but not consistently. Greek participants placed in mostly German groups slightly reduced their bribery rates. However, German participants in mostly Greek groups did not significantly change their behavior.
Another key observation: participants who were in the minority, regardless of nationality, tended to earn less by the end of the game. This was likely because they engaged in bribery less often than the majority around them. The study suggests that refusing to participate in corrupt systems can lead to real disadvantages.
When comparing the two types of bribes, the study found that queue-jumping carried a heavier moral burden than counter-bribing. Participants showed greater hesitation when bribery granted them an unfair advantage. Bribing to protect a place in line was viewed as more acceptable, even if still morally questionable.
The study involved 604 university students in controlled lab settings in Athens and Nuremberg. Participants were grouped into small teams with designated roles. They played the game over multiple rounds, making decisions about whether to bribe and observing how others responded.
To better understand the motivations behind each decision, the research team used mathematical models to measure the perceived social cost of bribery. They found that the internal “moral price” people assigned to each type of bribe had a significant impact on whether they went through with it.
Greece and Germany were chosen because of their contrasting reputations regarding public sector corruption. Transparency International ranks Germany near the top for clean governance, while Greece ranks much lower. These rankings reflect public perceptions and helped guide the researchers’ expectations.
The experiment’s findings support earlier studies that show people in high-corruption environments may be more likely to accept bribery as a normal part of life. However, this study also highlights how quickly people can adapt when surrounded by different norms.
Interestingly, even when Greek and German participants were placed in the same group, the influence of the majority culture was limited. Cultural habits and internal moral judgments remained strong.
The researchers emphasized that their goal was not to label one group as more ethical than another. Instead, they aimed to understand how different societies respond when faced with everyday forms of corruption—and how social pressure and strategic thinking shape those responses.
The study also hints at why tackling corruption is so difficult. In some cases, individuals may feel forced to engage in bribery simply to avoid falling behind. In that sense, corruption can act like a trap, where refusing to bribe puts someone at a disadvantage.
In the real world, someone who plays fair may get stuck in the system while others move ahead, the authors observed. That reality may encourage even reluctant individuals to participate in corrupt behavior over time.
