Gen-Z Police Officers' Ethical Compliance in Social Media Use: A PLS-SEM Study

Authors

  • Adrianus Adhiwira Yoga Pradana Doctoral Program in Human Resource Development (PSDM), Postgraduate School, Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia
  • Prawitra Thalib Airlangga University
  • Mohammad Fakhruddin Mudzakkir Doctoral Program in Human Resource Development (PSDM), Postgraduate School, Airlangga University, Surabaya, Indonesia
  • Syafri Sasmito Sangaji Wisnuwardhana University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35879/jik.v20i2.735

Keywords:

Theory of Planned Behaviour, Generation Z, Polri Code of Ethics, social media compliance, self-efficacy, subjective norms

Abstract

This study examines the effects of attitude, subjective norms, and self-efficacy on motivation to comply with the professional code of ethics, and the effect of that motivation on self-reported ethical compliance in social media use among Generation Z members of the Indonesian National Police (Polri) under the East Java Regional Police. A quantitative, cross-sectional explanatory survey was conducted with 769 active personnel aged 18-28 years who use social media, drawn through voluntary-response (convenience) sampling from 38,861 active personnel recorded in the Sistem Informasi Personel Polri (SIPP, 2026). Data were analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS 3. Attitude did not significantly affect motivation to comply with the code of ethics (β = -0.010, t = 0.347, p = .728). Subjective norms (β = 0.328, t = 4.108, p < .001) and self-efficacy (β = 0.598, t = 7.057, p < .001) had positive and significant effects on motivation, while motivation positively and significantly affected self-reported compliance (β = 0.738, t = 18.697, p < .001). The findings indicate that ethical compliance in digital environments is associated more strongly with social pressure and perceived behavioural control than with personal attitude. Polri should therefore strengthen peer- and supervisor-based ethical norms alongside confidence-building digital-ethics training. Because the study is cross-sectional and based on self-report data, the results should be interpreted as associational rather than strictly causal.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683.

Arli, D., & Tjiptono, F. (2014). The end of religion? Examining the role of religiousness, materialism, and long-term orientation on consumer ethics in Indonesia. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 385-400.

Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta‐analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471-499.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(3), 285-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(91)90021-H

Chan, M., & Lu, M. (2004). Understanding internet banking adoption and use behavior: A Hong Kong perspective. Journal of Global Information Management, 12(3), 21-43.

Cheon, J., Lee, S., Crooks, S. M., & Song, J. (2012). An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Computers & Education, 59(3), 1054-1064.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press.

Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11(2), 87-98.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.

Han, H., Hsu, L. T. J., & Sheu, C. (2010). Application of the theory of planned behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmentally friendly activities. Tourism Management, 31(3), 325-334.

Lubi, A., & Sanaji (2015). Testing The Theory of Planned Behavior and Perceived Risk to Predict Intention to Used of Pay Later Services. Journal of Business and Management Review, 4(9), 669-685. DOI: 10.47153/jbmr49.7882023

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Park, H., & Blenkinsopp, J. (2009). Whistleblowing as planned behavior - A survey of South Korean police officers. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), 545-556.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., Gibson, D. G., & Toffler, B. L. (1999). Managing ethics and legal compliance: What works and what hurts. California Management Review, 41(2), 131-151.

Tyler, T. R. (2006). Why people obey the law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.

Downloads

Published

2026-08-10

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 2 (2026): Jurnal Ilmu Kepolisian Volume 20 Nomor 2 Tahun 2026

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Ilmu Kepolisian

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.