Abstract

Particularism—bending rules to help one’s friends and relations—is a morally ambiguous form of corruption that, unlike bribery, might be justified by virtues of loyalty and care. To test whether they involve distinct moral vulnerabilities, we developed a 16-item Particularism vs. Bribery Tolerance Scale (PBTS) using lay input from Chinese populations, Rasch modeling, and Bayesian structural equation modeling (BSEM). Two pilot studies (N = 91; N = 114) in Hong Kong and the Chinese mainland generated topic-matched scenarios of either particularism or bribery. In Study 1 (N = 499), eight pairs of scenarios were selected based on topic coverage, Rasch fit indices, and similar item functioning between Hong Kong and mainland Chinese participants. In Study 2 (N = 991), BSEM analyses supported the scale’s two-factor structure, partial scalar invariance across regions, and convergent and discriminant validity. Critically, when controlling for shared variance, particularism tolerance was uniquely associated with moral excuse-making (high Moral Disengagement and low Rule Orientation) and not with virtues. In contrast, bribery tolerance was negatively related to caring virtues (Reciprocal Filial Piety and Warm virtues) and positively related to Authoritarian Filial Piety. The PBTS provides a psychometrically sound tool for investigating distinct moral motivations associated with bribery vs. particularism.