Religiosity, ethics education and incorruptibility of accounting students

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Table 1. Outer model specifications.

Latent variable	Indicators	Outer loadings	Cronbach’s alpha	Composite reliability (rho_a)	Composite reliability (rho_c)	Average variance extracted (AVE)
Ethics education (EI)	EI1	0.678	0.874	0.889	0.902	0.571
	EI2	0.755
	EI3	0.803
	EI4	0.813
	EI5	0.831
	EI6	0.770
	EI7	0.617
Religious belief (RB)	Rel1	0.827	0.847	0.896	0.884	0.565
	Rel2	0.817
	Rel3	0.859
	Rel4	0.666
	Rel5	0.744
	Rel6	0.552
Anticorruption propensity (ACP)	AP1	0.804	0.852	0.871	0.912	0.777
	AP2	0.844
	AP3	0.986

Table 2. HTMT ratios.

		Confidence Interval
	HTMT ratios	Lower Limit 2.5%	Upper Limit 97.5%
Religiosity -> Ethics education	0.467	0.329	0.590
Age -> Ethics education	0.070	0.052	0.139
Age -> Religiosity	0.076	0.053	0.154
Anticorrupt propensity -> Ethics education	0.346	0.236	0.456
Anticorrupt propensity -> Religiosity	0.151	0.063	0.281
Anticorrupt propensity -> age	0.019	0.010	0.119
Gender -> Ethics education	0.041	0.030	0.132
Gender -> Religiosity	0.055	0.035	0.140
Gender -> age	0.050	0.002	0.143
Gender -> anticorrupt propensity	0.038	0.014	0.122

Figure 2. Structural equation model.

Table 3. Inner model specifications.

Hypotheses		Beta (β)	SD	t-stat	P-value	R^2	f^2	VIF
H1	R -> E I	0.444	0.059	7.575	0.000	0.197	0.245	1.000
H2	E I -> A P	0.300	0.053	5.672	0.000	0.090	0.079	1.249
H3	R -> A P	0.002	0.059	0.034	0.973		0.000	1.249
	Age -> A P	−0.011	0.048	0.232	0.817		0.000	1.004
	Gender -> A P	−0.002	0.094	0.026	0.979		0.000	1.005

R = Religiosity; EI = Ethics education; AP = anticorruption propensity.

Table 4. Mediating effect.

Variables	Indirect effects			Direct effects	Mediation type
	Path coefficient	T Stat	P values
R -> E I -> A P	0.133	4.342	0.001	insignificant	Full mediation

R =Religiosity; EI = Ethics education; AP = anticorruption propensity.

Data availability statement

Data is available on request.