Students’ Attitude toward Corruption and their Behavioural Intention to Corrupt or not to Corrupt in the Future: The Philippines’ Context

The study intends to determine the correlation between students' attitudes toward corruption and their behavior plan to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. To support the study, related literature and studies were reviewed and to carry out the study, the research methodology was proposed. The study used a descriptive correlational research design. To gather the data, questionnaires were used and the data were treated using Pearson r or Product Moment Correlation Coefficient to determine the correlation between two variables and Weighted mean was used to determine the level of cognitive, affective attitude and their behavioral intention. The study found that there is no significant correlation between cognitive and affective attitude and students' behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. However, there is a correlation between cognitive and affective attitudes. The next study is recommended to focus on other aspects such as social context and norms to predict the corrupt behavior of students in the future.

(100-44 B.C.) tried to impose hard measures on the corrupt officials such as dismissal from the service and return the stolen money or gold (Brioschi, & Shugaar, (2017, pp. 39-50). So, it is correct to say that corruption is as old as human history. The First Dynasty (3100-2700 BC) of ancient Egypt, the issue of corruption noted in its judiciary (El-Saady, 1998). Corruption practice was also found in ancient China as reflected in the Chinese Mythology about Kitchen God in which the Kitchen God watches the behavior of every member of the household. Before the Chines New year, the Kitchen God ascends to heaven to present an annual report to the ruler of heaven, the Jade Emperor and the fate of the household depends on the result of the report (One World, Nations Online, n.d). There was no corruption perception Index as of the present but the corruption did happen. Systematic studies on corruption were just begun in the 1990s by Transparency International (TI) which now is known as the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) in which it follows the trend of corruption by country (Wasow, 2011).
Each country has its history of corruption and one cannot say that there is a country without corruption. The corruption exists in every country but the level of corruption of each country might vary. In the 1990s Philippines was ranked number 9 as one of the most corrupt countries besides Nigeria (1), Pakistan (2), Kenya (3), China (4), Cameroon (5), Egypt (6), Columbia (7), Uganda (8), Indonesia (10) (Hays, 2015). Currently, these countries are still struggling with the same problem. Though the level of corruption is reduced, however, they are still listed as the most corrupt countries. The Philippines is ranked 99 from 180 countries, Indonesia (89), Egypt (105), Columbia (99), Nigeria (144), Pakistan, (117), China (87), Uganda (149), Kenya (144), Cameroon (152). In contrast to these countries, we have lists of countries that are the least corrupt such as Denmark (1), New Zealand (2), Finland (3), Singapore (3), Sweden (3), Switzerland (3), Norway (7), Netherlands (8), Canda (9) and Luxemburg (9) (Rubio, 2018). The contrast pictures of corruption describe the effectiveness of a certain country in fighting against corruption. Some countries have not done enough, while other countries have done their best to reduce corruption.
The Philippines is one of Asia's countries that has been the center of discussion when it comes to corruption. Sometimes it goes down but then it goes up. It goes nowhere, after one administration to another administration. Corruption stays and it becomes a regular experience encountered by many people, to the extent that people are losing hope and trust in the government when it comes to corruption prevention. The habitual occurrence of corruption can form the mindset of every young child born in that environment. It can instill in the mind of a young generation thatcorruption practices are an integral part of business transactions to get things done. Corruption may be considered as symptomatic signs of moral decay (Ncube, 2017).
However, though corruption is seen as an ordinary way of life (Ncube, 2017), many people still consider corruption as an issue to be prevented. It cannot be a way of life. For many, corruption is not accepted as a good way of life that must be perpetuated but it must be eradicated because of its ill effect on human life or poverty. But the question is where do we start to prevent corruption and how are we going to do it? It is a complex issue that there is no single solution, but we can learn from countries that are successful in curbing corruption.
The concern of this paper is to see students'attitudes andfeelingsabout corruption. They have been living in a corrupt environment and they have heard corruption issues that affect the country. The researcher believes that a corrupt environment can affect their attitude toward corruption. As we believe that attitude is still a key predictor of behavior (Allport, 1968). Their attitude toward corruption can affect their behavior toward corruption. Corrupt attitudes and corrupt values may influence corrupt behavior. Therefore, preventing corruption is to detect as early as possible the attitude of students toward corruption and clear their minds as early as possible. One needs to know the values, the attitude of the youth and redirect their values and attitudes. Knowing their attitudeand their feelingtoward corruption, they can be educated as early as possible about the danger of corruption to the society and how they can be taught to prevent corruption. The paper recognized that they have been born in a corrupt environment and therefore, they have an idea about corruption and thus, we would like to find out their attitude toward corruption.
There were previous studies conducted on the attitude toward corruption but there are no studies related to measuring the effect of the attitude toward corruption and behavioral plan to corrupt in the future. This study is trying to see the correlation between the attitude toward corruption of the youth or Senior High School students and their intention to corrupt in the future.
The current study is divided into five parts. The first part is the introduction that discusses the rationale of the study and the objective of the study. The second part is a related review that discusses the concept of human attitude, human behavior, the relationship between human attitude and human behavior, and the role of society in forming the attitude toward corruption, conceptual framework, and statement of the problems and the hypothesis of the study. The third part is the research methodology that discusses the research design, locale of the study, population, data gathering instrument and statistical treatment of the data. The fourth part is empirical data and analysis. This part presents the data that were collected and analyzed. Lastly or the fifth part is the conclusion of the study.

II. Review of Literature and Studies
On the theoretical framework, I adopt my previous discussion on attitude and behavior. I have written and published several papers related to the students' attitudes toward higher education and their academic engagement, the attitude of students toward research and their behavioral plan to conduct research, students' attitude toward the environment and their environmental behavior, that were published in other international journals. Since they are originated from the same author, it is expected to have the same idea on the subject matter. The ideas on attitude and behavior are the same as I have presented in the previous papers and so it is not surprising if a reader found the same idea and presentation in other papers that I have published. The ideas on attitude and behavior are based on the ideas of Fishbein (1977, 2000) and the idea of Allport (1968) and supported by other researchers. After many pieces of research have been done on the relationship between attitude and behavior and reading other researches, I am convinced of the theory of attitude that affects behavior.

Concept of Human Attitude
Attitude is an individual's disposition to react to certain objects, behavior, person, institution, event or other discriminable aspects of the individual's world (Ajzen, 1993). Ajzen contended that there can be a lot of definitions of attitude from different theorists, however, there is a common agreement among them that attitude has its evaluative dimension (Bem, 1970, Edwards, 1957, Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975. In the sense that dimensions of attitude can be measured and evaluated. Ajzen (1993) recognized that though attitude is inaccessible to observations because it is within the person's mind or it is latent but it can be measured through the reaction or responses of the person toward the object of the attitude which may be favorable or unfavorable toward the object, persons, institution, events or situations. There are three categories of responses or reactions and they are cognitive, affective and conative responses (Allport, 1954, Hilgard, 1980, Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960. These are manifestations of salient or latent attitude which is unobservable (Ajzen, 1993). Cognitivecomponent refers to the beliefs and thoughts about the subject, the object, the person, the institution, the event, etc. It is about the perception and information of the person toward the subject, object or person. The affective component of attitude is an emotional reaction toward the subject, object or person. It is how one feels when he/she is confronting the subject, object, the person or the institution. It is still a psychological reaction which may be a verbal or nonverbal expression of feelings toward the subject, object, the person or the institution. Such a reaction may be negative or positive. While the conative component of attitudeis the effect of the attitudes toward a behavioral intention or how the attitude affects one's behavior. These may include plans, intentions, and commitments to a planned behavior. These are the three components of attitude and therefore, attitude is a multidimensional construct.
The question can be raised concerning the origin of attitude: where does it come from? According to Ajzen (1993), a person develops such an attitude perhaps as a result of watching a television program or maybe other kind exposures or experiences. But Abun (2017) went deeper to answer that question concerning his argument on how to solve an environmental problem. According to him, that environmental problem is a result of human behavior and destructive human behavior is originated from the culture and thus solving the environmental problem is to revisit the culture that has influenced the mind of people toward the environment. He contends that attitude is originated from the culture where the person is raised. His argument was based on the ideas of anthropologists such as Donald (2002), Hofstede as cited by Brown (1995). Donald (2002) argued that culture is playing an important role in our brain functioning and even brain structure. She has pointed out that language has the biggest impact on brain structure but that culture influences brain functioning to a great extent as she writes: The social environment includes many factors that impinge on development, from bonding and competitive stress to the social facilitation of learning. These can affect brain functioning in many ways, but usually, they have no direct influence on functional brain architecture. However, symbolizing cultures own a direct path into our brains and affect the way major parts of the executive brain become wired up during development. This is the key idea behind the notion of deep enculturation... This process entails setting up the very complex hierarchies of cognitive demons (automatic programs) that ultimately establish the possibility of new forms of thought. Culture effectively wires up functional subsystems in the brain that would not otherwise exist.
The idea of culture and its effect on brain functioning indicates the power of culture over the formation of the mind and ideas of people about everything around them (Abun, 2018). Donald's View is similar to what Hofstede as cited by Brown (1995) as he argued that culture is the collective programming of the human mind that distinguishes the members of one human group from those of another. Hofstede pointed out clearly that that culture is reflected in how people think, how people view things or attitude. To elaborate on the idea of Hofstede, Amstrong (1996) contend that there is a relationship between cultural dimensions and ethical perceptions. In other words, an ethical attitude is formed by a particular culture. One perceives a certain object, subject, person or institution to be negative or positive, favorable or not favorable because he/she has been taught by the culture of a particular society where he/she is living. What he/she learns from the culture will be his/her ideas about a certain subject, object or events, etc. that he/she will encounter.

The Concept of Human Behavior
To understand the root cause of human behavior, it would be helpful to revisit the idea of William James, a pragmatist, a behavioral psychologist, as cited by Lawler (2006). James is against the idea that all human behavior is shaped by experience, but it is shaped by the brain or the mind. Though James recognized that humans are ruled by their instincts as other animals do, but what makes humans behave the way they do and how they behave the way do is different from animals. James went on to explain that though humans are animals with the most instincts, they will never react automatically to the instincts, the way inferior animals do because humans have the mind or the reason. It is the role of reason. The reason has to create another impulse to neutralize another impulse.
To complicate further the root cause of human behavior, Ridley (2011) turns his attention to nature versus nurture debate to bring the first popular account of the root of human behavior with this unique question: "what makes us who we are?" This question is related to the main question of why humans behave the way they do and how they behave the way they do. The immediate answer to these questions may point to the very essence of human beings that differentiates it from the animal which the reason or the mind is. But Nohria, Sandelands, and Lawrence (2003), instead of pointing at reason or mind as the source of human behavior, pointed out four drives or qualities that shape human behavior. According to her, these drives or qualities are important to understand why humans behave the way they do. These qualities or drives are conflicting, and they do not work automatically. They force us to make deliberate decisions and choices with a certain degree of liberty. According to this argument, drives or qualities that shape our human behavior are first, drives to gain object, bodily and emotional experience, maintaining life and improving one's social status concerning others. Second, drive to create relations, to belong to a group and create a long terms relationship and caring for others. Third, drive to gain insight including understanding one's self and one's surroundings. Fourth, drives to control and defend. These are qualities for us to understand why we behave in a certain way. In other words, human behavior is driven by purposes to be accomplished, not just like other animals.
The later argument brings us to the theory of planned behavior of Ajzen (1985, 1987, Ajzen & Madden, 1986). The theory of planned behavior (TPB) is an extension of the theory of reasoned action to explain the relationship between attitudes and behavior within the human action. Reasoned Action Theory (RAT) argues that the reason for action will predict how an individual will behave based on their pre-existing attitude and behavior intention. The theory argues that an individual will behave based on the expected outcome the individual expects to achieve as a result of performing such behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975, Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980. If the RAT focuses on the reason, while the central attention of the Theory of Planned Behavior or TPB is the individual's intention to perform a given behavior. There are three independent determinants of intention. The first determinant is the attitude toward the behavior. At the level, the person who performs certain behavior must evaluate if the behavior in question is favorable or not favorable. The second determinant is a social factor or subjective norms. At this level, the person who performs the act must evaluate if the society is in favor or not in favor of such act or behavior. The third is the novel antecedence of intention. This refers to the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior and it is assumed to reflect experience on performing the behavior and anticipated impediments and obstacles in performing the behavior. It suggests that the more favorable the attitude and subjective norms concerning behavior, and the greater the perceived behavioral control, the stronger should be an individual's intention to perform the behavior under consideration (Ajzen, 1993).
In short, the theory of planned behavior argues that the stronger people's intention to perform a certain behavior, or the stronger people's intention to achieve their behavioral goals the more likely they engage in such behavior. However, Ajzen (1993) cautions us that the degree of success does not depend only on intention but some circumstances may prevent us to realize the behavior in consideration and these may include opportunities and resources such as time, money skills, and other requirements to perform such behavior. These factors represent the actual control over the behavior. Beyond that, since TPB is concerned with the perceived behavior, the particular perceived behavior may not be carried out due to lack of information about the behavior, the requirements have changed and when other unpredicted elements have entered into the situation.

Attitude is Key Predictor to Behavior
In psychology, an attitude is defined as a set of emotions, beliefs, and behaviors toward a particular object, person, thing, or event (Banaji & Heiphetz, 2010). It is a learned tendency to evaluate or perceived things in a certain way and therefore one can have a positive or negative evaluation or perception of certain objects, experiences, practices, etc. The evaluation or perception of a person toward a certain object or experience is not isolated from experiential exposure. It has been a common understanding and agreement that attitudes are results of experience, upbringing/education and social interactions. Experience or upbringing or education can have a powerful influence over attitudes. However, since attitude is not independent of environment or experience, thus it is also accepted that attitudes are dynamics in the sense that it is enduring and the same time it can also be changed (Cherry, 2019).
Most of the early researches on attitude accepted as a given that attitude influenced the behavior. The background of those studies was influenced by the ideas of early social psychologists that attitude is a key to understand human behavior (Thomas & Znaniecki, 1918, Watson, 1925. This idea was taken for granted for quite some time until the time that later studies proved otherwise. Some investigators challenged the earlier assumption through field studies on the relationship between attitude and behavior and their studies found that there was no correlation or little correlation between attitude and behavior. For example, Corey (9137), Freeman & Ataoev, (1960) as cited by Ajzen (1993) conducted a study on the college students' attitude at the beginning of the semester and provide multiple opportunities to cheat by allowing them to score their test. His test found that there was no correlation between students' attitude and their cheating behavior (Ajzen, 1993, p.74). Even later studies supported the study of Corey (1937). For example, Dean (1958) conducted a study on attitude toward labor unions and participating in labor union meetings, and his study found no correlation. A similar study was also done by Wicker and Pomazal, (1971) on the attitude toward participating in a subject in social psychology and actual participation in a social psychology class. Their studies found no correlation.
The finding of later studies particularly the study of Wicker (1969) seem discouraging the original idea of early social psychologists that attitudes are the key to predict behavior. The results of those studies have questioned the importance of studying personal disposition and behavior. By the 1970s most social psychologists accepted the negative verdict of the relationship between attitude and behavior. Instead of studying the relationship between attitude and behavior, they encouraged the study of social context and norms as a determinant factor in predicting behavior or human action (De Fleur & Westie, 1958, Deutscher, 1969. However, given those negative results, other social psychologists, particularly Fishbein (1977, 2000,) still maintain that attitude is still key to predict the behavior (Allport, 1968). Allport (1968) still considered attitude to be "the most distinctive and indispensable concept in contemporary American social psychology" (p. 59). Other social psychologists who were against the negative finding of early research argued that the inconsistencies are not with the attitude and behavior itself, but it may happen because of many factors such as response biases, the multidimensionality of attitudes, and moderating variables. In terms of response biases, they argue that there is a tendency to give socially desirable responses on attitude and personality inventories and along with this point, they recommended the need to use attitude measures that are less subject to systematic biases (Ajzen, 1993). Concerning the multidimensionality of attitudes, they pointed out that most attitude measurement technique resulted in a single score representing the respondent's overall positive or negative reaction to the attitude object. According to them, focus on a single dimension did not do justice to the complexity of the attitude construct (Allport, 1935). Single construct is against attitude as a multidimensional construct which includes cognition, affective and conation component (Rosenberg & Hovland, 1960). Lastly, the inconsistencies are due to moderating variables. They argued that the degree of attitude-behavior consistency was assumed to be moderated by factors related to the person performing the behavior such as self-awareness, self-efficacy, self-monitoring, experience, self-confidence, even feeling and lack of information or knowledge. They also pointed out the situation as moderating variables such as time pressure or circumstances surrounding the performance of the behavior (Ajzen, 1993).
The recent studies conducted by Abun (2018) and Fitzsimmons and Douglas (2005) confirmed the consistency of attitude and behavior. Abun (2018) measured the relationship between environmental attitude and environmental behavior and the study found that environmental attitude predicted the environmental behavior of the students and employees toward the environment. Further, he also conducted a study on the entrepreneurial attitude and future intention to establish a business and the finding also indicated a correlation. The study of Fitzsimmons and Douglas (2005) also found that entrepreneurial attitudes are significant in explaining career decisions in the future and their intention to go into business.

Corruption in the Philippines
Corruption is using an official position to take something which is not yours. Merriam Webster defines it as "dishonest or illegal behavior especially by powerful people such as government officials or police officers. It is an "inducement to wrong by improper or unlawful means such as bribery". The transparency International (n.d) defines it as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain".While the Anti-Corruption Resource Center (n.d) defines corruption as "the abuse of entrusted power for private gain". From these three definitions, there is a common definition of corruption which is an abuse of power by the officials or those in the position for private gain.
Corruption as an abuse of power can be in different forms such as bribery, cronyism, extortion, nepotism, patronage, influence peddling, graft, and embezzlement. To offer us a clear understanding of what we discuss in this paper, we need to understand the meaning of each form of corruption. There can be a lot of definitions from different sources on the forms of corruption but mostly the definitions are similar to each other and with the same substance. Transparency International (n.d) defines bribery as "the offering, promising, giving, accepting or soliciting of an advantage as an inducement for an action which is illegal, unethical or a breach of trust. Inducements can take the form of money, gifts, loans, fees, rewards or other advantages"This definition includes the active and passive understanding of bribery. Active bribery occurs when a person promises, offers and gives a bribe but when a person requests, receives and accepts the bribe is called passive bribery (Transparency International, n.d). Cronyism is defined as "giving the job to friends rather than to independent people who have the necessary skills and experience" (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d), or "partiality to cronies in the appointment of political hangers-on to the office without regard to their qualifications" (Mirriam Webster). Extortion is defined by LegalDictionary (n.d) as, "obtaining of property from another induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear or under color of official right". Nepotism is defined as "the practice of a person in power giving good positions and opportunities to relatives" (Legal Dictionary, n.d). While patronage is understood as "practice observed by the political official of filling government positions with qualified employees of his own choosing" (Legal Dictionary, n.d). Influence peddling is understood as "the practice of using money, wealth, personal undertaking, or gifts to purchase a favorable outcome or decision from an official, government officeholder, or public authority" (Shantz, 2012).Graft means the obtaining of money through the dishonest use of power and influence" (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d). Lastly, embezzlement is "illegally taking money that is in your care or that belongs to an organization or business you work for" (Cambridge Dictionary, n.d).
These forms of corruption are all found in the Philippines inmany areas of government services such as judicial system, police, public service, land administration, tax administration, customs administration, public procurement, natural resources are affected by corruption (GAN, n.d). Though the judiciary is considered to be independent but the reality is that its independence is only related to its relationship with the executive branch in which the executive branch of government must respect their independence in terms of decision making and the direction of their office and cannot be forced or influenced from the executive branch of government. It is expected to be fair in the legal process and deliver justice to all. But it cannot be denied by the fact that they can be bribed or influenced by the rich and the powerful individual in their decision-making. Decisions are often influenced by powerful individuals, money, nepotism, and favoritism (GAN, n.d). This is the reason why associate justice Marvice Leonen as cited by Buan (2018) argued that corruption weakens judicial independence far more than political interference. It is not the interference from the executive branch of government that matters to the judiciary but it is corruption. Along with the judiciary is the police, the law enforcers. It is regarded as one of the most corrupt institutions in the country (Morella & France-Presse, 2017). Besides the police force, other government offices are also tainted by corruption. According to the SWS (2016) survey that three (3) out of five (5) businesses have bribed someone in the government to get things done. Ombudsman Office Survey (2014) detailed government services that are bribed by families related to services: availing of social services, payment of taxes and duties, access to justice, securing registry documents and licenses and other services. Corruption is also rampant in the Land Administration. Reportedly that two (2) out of five (5) companies bribed the officials to obtain construction permits (GAN, n.d). BIR is also not out of the list. This is one of the government agencies that have been bombarded by accusations of corruption. Based on the survey as cited by GAN (n.d) that one out of seven companies have bribed tax officials. It is also supported by SWS (2016) survey that "only a fifth of businesses in their line of business pay their taxes honestly" and thus majority are not paying their taxes correctly. Commonly, business practitioners encounter difficulties when dealing with the Bureau of Customs. The problem of bureaucracy makes it easy for corruption. GETR (2016) reported that businesses bribe is a common practice at the Bureau of Customs and they even pointed out that import procedures are very problematic, and this is the corrupt area. Public Procurement is also not left behind in terms of corruption. According to the SWS (2016) survey as cited by GAN (n.d) that a fifth of businesses has bribed the officials to win government contracts. Though the government has shown improvement along with natural resources governance, however, it is still pointed out that government corruption allowed the mining companies to evade government regulations.
The data cited above indicate that corruption has emerged in different government services, not only on the national level but even at different levels of government offices. It is common knowledge. It cannot be denied that such an environment has formed the perception of young people about the corruption level of the country. Though the government has tried its best to reduce corruption, however, people still perceived the government corrupt. Latest Transparency International (2018)

Filipinos' Attitude toward Corruption
Corruption has been part of everyday life in the Philippines because newspapers and televisions almost always report a corruption incident. Having bombarded by issues of corruption, if not daily but weekly or monthly, people can form a certain attitude toward corruption. Mangahas (2018) released a comparative survey among Asian countries and America on the attitude toward the government. One of the questions in such a survey was about Filipinos' perception of corruption in government. One of the findings of the study was that seven out of ten Filipinos and South Koreans believed that there are "quite a lot" or "almost all" politicians involved in corruption. While Thais, Taiwanese, and Americans are only four out of ten believed that politicians are involved in corruption. Because of its persistent presence in society, people have considered it as part of the culture or part of life and it will be very difficult to remove. It is embedded in the system and reinforced by economic and social inequalities (FilipiKnow, n.d). To this point, it forms the mind of the young Filipinos that corruption is a culture and a lifestyle (Youngster Online, 2014). People's frustration on corruption prevalence has formed their perception toward politics and government that both are corrupt (Philstar Global, 2008). It is already an endemic problem because it has become the rule, not the exception, as part of a business transaction (Philstar Global, 2009). It is a practice and part of the culture of the society. The root causesarethe structure of society in which the majority of Filipinos or around 80% are poor and only 20% are rich but unfortunately the 80% have no voice in decision making but only 20%. They have no voice to contribute to decisions that affect their life (Robredillo, 2017). Besides social structure is also self-aggrandizement in which people have the mindset that being in the government is for power, wealth and social status. Because of such a mindset, those who occupy the position, instead of using it for service but self-aggrandizement. Consequently, such kind of mindset results in using position to accumulate personal wealth and using public money as his own money. Contributing to such causes is also a weak justice system in the sense that those who have money or the rich can get away with it.
Stories of corruption are not only happening in the national government but it is also in the local government. SWS (2012) survey as quoted by ABS CBN (2012) indicated that 68 % of Filipinos believed that their city or municipal governments are corrupt. It seems that corruption is not going down but it is going higher as indicated by the same survey that a year before (2011) that 64 % and 58% (2009) Filipinos believed that their city or municipal governments are corrupt. Specifically, the budget office (48%), Mayor's office (32%) and City Engineer's Office (30%) were considered to be the most corrupt. The spread of corruption to the local level has developed an understanding that corruption is something "normal" or part of the organizational process (Gault, 2016).

Corrupt society forms the attitude of the youth toward corruption and intention to corrupt
There have been studies conducted in line with the attitude of the youth or students toward corruption. Society's practice affects the perception of the youth toward corruption and their intention to corrupt in the future. Barr, and Serra (2010) conducted a study among undergraduate studentsin the UK on the effect of prevailing social norms and values in society and their decisions to corrupt in the future. The respondents were mixed from different countries. One of the values that were investigated is bribery and it was found that these students would act corruptly in the future in their home country.This finding suggests that when the youth is raised in a corrupt environment will also corrupt in the future. It is also confirmed by the study of Salmon and Serra (2017) among Americans characterized by cultural heterogeneity due to the immigration of their parents. The study found that the corruption tendency is reduced among individuals who identify culturally with countries characterized bylow levels of corruption. In other words, when one is raised or associated with corrupt countries, then the tendency to corrupt is higher compared to those who are raised in a less corrupt country. In other words, experience on corrupt practices affect the attitude of a person toward corruptionand potentiality to corrupt in the future (ShengLee&Guven, 2013)This is to say that corrupt environment affects their values or beliefs and such beliefs become predictor either to be corrupt or not corrupt in the future as Berninghaus, et al. (2013) found that risk attitude and beliefs and corruption and the study found that beliefs appeared to be a better predictor of whether or not they would opt for the corrupt alternative in the future.
A national survey on the attitude of youths toward corruption in Cambodia and how they value integrity revealed a striking result. Though the youth believed that integrity is vital to society and the only way to prevent corruption but sadly they are still willing to sacrifice integrity to benefit themselves, their friends and their family. This attitude is a result of their direct experience of corruption because most of the youth have experienced practicing corruption.Though they have the desire to combat corruption, their desire or good intention is sacrificed for the sake of themselves, family and friends (Transparency International Cambodia, 2015). The Transparency International Cambodia revealed that 60 percent of youths are willing to pay a kickback of 10-20 percent of their future salary to a person who can secure them a job and half of those surveyed believe it is acceptable to give an unofficial payment to a doctor or nurse to receive better medical treatment. Further, it is also found that 31 percent agree that it is acceptable to gain entrance to a good school or get hired by a good company with the help of a relative rather than going through official selection procedures and 24 percent of those surveyed think it is acceptable to give an additional payment to a public official in order to hasten vehicle registration.A similar study in Vietnam conducted by Transparency International (2011) revealed that though the Vietnamese youth have a clear sense of right and wrong, they are unlikely to resist corruption and are willing to participate in it. Though they believe in integrity and the negative effect of corruption, they are ready to compromise their values when faced with corruption. The study revealed further that 35 percent will bribe when it is financially advantageous, will solve a problem or when the bribe is small, and 45 percent consider it acceptable to bribe their way to better hospital treatment and lastly, 38 percent are ready to pay a bribe to get into a good school or company. The corrupt environment has affected the mindset of the youth and this is also true to the Mongolian youth. The Asia Foundation (2016) on its annual survey on Perception and Knowledge of Corruption indicated that zero tolerance to corruption is less common to young people compared to older people. The survey pointed out that it is only 28 percent of the Mongolian youth will not bribe but the rest are willing to pay a bribe.

Independent Variables
Dependent Variables Figure 1: The framework reflects a relationship between attitude toward corruption and behavioral intention not to corrupt or to corrupt. This framework explains thetheory of the study that our attitude affects our behavior.

Statement of the Problems
The study wants to determine the relationship between attitude toward corruption and the behavioral intention of students to corrupt or not to corrupt. It specifically seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What is the cognitive attitude of students toward corruption? 2. What is the affective attitude of students toward corruption? 3. What is the behavioral intention of students to corrupt or not to corrupt? 4. Is there a relationship between cognitive attitude toward corruption and behavioral intention? 5. Is there a relationship between affective attitude toward corruption and behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt?

Assumption of the Study
The study assumes that the theory of the study is correct, that cognitive and affective attitudes affect the behavior of a person. This is also assumed further that the questionnaires are validated and the answers are objective.

Cognitive and Affective Attitudes toward Corruption
A. Cognitive Attitude B. Affective Attitude Behavioural Intention to corrupt or not to corrupt Hypothesis Fishbein (1977, 2000,) and Allport (1968) argued that attitude is a key predictor of human behavior and therefore the current study hypothesizes that attitude affects human behavior.

Scope and delimitation of the Study
The study limits itself to determine the relationship between cognitive and affective attitude toward corruption and the behavioral intention of students to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. It is limited to the first-and second-year college students of Divine word Colleges in Ilocos Sur and Ilocos Norte.

III. Methodology
The study was carried out through appropriate research methodologies such as research design, data gathering instruments, population, the locale of the study, data gathering procedures and statistical treatment of data.

Research Design
The study used a descriptive correlational research design to determine the level of cognitive and affective attitudes of students toward corruption and behavioral intentions to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. The nature of descriptive research is to describe what is found in the data collected through questionnaires and statistical treatment. It is also used to describe profiles, frequency distribution, describe characteristics of people, situation, phenomena or relationship variables. In short, it describes "what is" about the data (Ariola, 2006, cited by Abun, 2019).
In line with the current study, the descriptive correlational method was deployed. The study determines the level of cognitive and affective attitude toward corruption and its correlation with the plan to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. This was to determine what the dominant attitude of students toward corruption was and what particular attitudes affect the behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt.

The locale of the Study
The locale of the study was Divine Word Colleges in Ilocos Region which is composed of Divine Word College of Vigan and Divine Word College of Laoag. Divine Word College of Vigan is belonged to the Province of Ilocos Sur and located within the heritage city of Vigan. Divine Word College of Laoag is located in Laoag City, Ilocos Norte. Divine Word Colleges in Region I are run by the Congregation of the Divine Word Missionaries or known as Society of the Divine Word or in Latin, Societas Verbi Divini (SVD).

Population
The population of the study was composed of all grade XI and XII students of Divine Word Colleges in the Ilocos region. Since the total numbers of students are limited, and therefore total enumeration is the sampling design of the study. A total of 400 hundred students were taken as the respondents of the study.

Data Gathering instruments
The study utilized validated questionnaires. The questionnaires were adapted from the ATC scale or

Data Gathering Procedures
In the process of data gathering, the researcher sent letters to the President of the Colleges, requesting them to allow the researcher to flow his questionnaires in the college. The researcher personally met the Presidents and students and requested them to answer the questionnaires.
The retrieval of questionnaires was arranged between the President's representative and the researcher with the help of employees and faculty of the college.

Statistical Treatment of Data
In consistence with the study as descriptive research, therefore descriptive statistics were used. The weighted mean is used to determine the level of cognitive and affective attitude of students toward corruption and behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corruptand the Pearson r was used to measure the correlation of attitudes toward corruption and the behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt.
The following ranges of values with their descriptive interpretation will be used:

IV. Empirical Data and Analysis
This part presentsthe data that were gathered through research questionnaires and has been tabulated statistically. The presentation of data and analysis would be arranged according to the statement of problems that were investigated. The following are the problems that were investigated: 1. What is the cognitive attitude of the students toward corruption? Aswe can see in the empirical data, it shows that as a whole, the students gained 3.56 mean average of cognitive attitude toward corruption which is considered to be high or agreeable. This can be shown in the individual question, that students agree or somewhat agree toward proposed questions given to them. They agree that corruption is everywhere in government offices (4.12), a major problem in their country (4.30), will always grow in the country and will not go away (3.56) and particularly they agree that bribery as a common problem in the country (3.69). They also somewhat agree that corruption is culturally accepted (2.65), politicians and government employees are corrupt (3.50), and citizens in the country are generally corrupt (3.07). Based on the data presented, it reveals that as a whole, students reached an average mean of 3.75 in their affective attitude toward corruption which means that in general,they agree with the proposed questions related to their emotion or feeling toward corruption. But looking into specific questions, they strongly agree thatthey feel sad when they learn that their country is corrupt (4.27), are happy if their country is not corrupt (4.49), are excited to work in a clean government (4.29), corruption does not make them proud as Filipino (4.18), and they agree that it is humiliating to be identified as a citizen of a corrupt country (3.82). But sadly at the other side of the picture is that they somewhat agree that corruption does not bother them at all even if the corruption is everywhere (2.66), does not make them happy or unhappy even if they know corruption is done by all citizens (3.03) and they do not care about corruption because it gives them headache (2.65). Looking into the behavioral intention of students, as a whole, students reach the average mean of 2.44 which can be understood as their disagreeableness to corrupt. Despite their knowledge or cognitive attitude toward corruption, they disagree that they will corrupt in the future. In general, students disagree with the proposed questions, particularly they disagree that doing something illegal for a living is acceptable (2.17), doing something illegal if it benefits their family (2.14),offering unofficial payment for the settlement of their case (2.30), givingmoney or a gift to a teacher to get a good grade for my child (2.27), cheating if it would advantage them and their family (2.25), and taking part in corruption if it involves big amount of money because it will help their children to go to school (2.23). On the other side of the picture, sadly they somewhat agree they prefer giving job to their family members if they will be leader in the future (2.68), can give additional payment to an official to speed up the registration of their vehicle (2.52), can give additional pay doctors for better care of their sick child or mother (2.95) and they somewhat agree that it is hard to refuse corruption when everybody is doing it (2.85). Based on the Pearson r correlation, it reveals that there is no significant correlation at 0.01 level (2-tailed) between cognitive attitude and behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt in the future. The same is true with affective attitude toward corruption and behavioral intention to corrupt or not to corrupt. This result shows that both, their cognitive and affective attitude toward corruption does not correlate to their intention to corrupt. Even they know the existence of corruption and how they feel about those corruptions, it will not motivate them to corrupt or not to corrupt. However, a correlation exists between cognitive attitude and affective attitude toward corruption.

V. Result and Discussion
The result of the study pointed out that though the students know that corruption is everywhere, and is done by everyone, it does not necessarily lead them to corrupt in the future. The same is true with their feelings toward corruption or affective attitude toward corruption. Even though they feel sad about corruption, it does not mean that they will follow the same path in the future. The result of this study suggests that corruption is not just caused by their attitude but it can be caused by other factors in the society such as the culture. The fact that they disagree and are not happy with corruption, but they still do it.

Implication
Corruption has been the main culprit of the underdevelopment of many countries. Not giving attention to corruption will mean poverty and bankruptcy. However, solving corruption needs a multifactor investigation. Youth is the future of society and if they are not educated about the danger of corruption, they can follow the same path and society will never go away from corruption. Therefore, other factors need to be investigated as other causes of corruption.

Conclusion
The hypothesis of the study was based on Fishbein's (1977, 2000,) and Allport's (1968) theory that attitude is a key predictor of human behavior. But the result of the current study does not support the hypothesis. In the Philippines context, corruption may not be caused by their attitude but it can be caused by other factors such associal context and norms.
The result of this study contributes to the controversy that was raised by previous researchers such as Wicker (1969).Several social psychologists have denied the relationship between attitude and behavior. They have recommended studyingsocial context and norms as a determinant factor in predicting behavior or human action (De Fleur & Westie, 1958, Deutscher, 1969.
The author inclines to follow the recommendation, that instead of studying the correlation between attitude and behavior, one can study social context and the culture of the place to determine the behavior of a person.
Consequently, the school should provide curriculum and seminars that discuss not only the cognitive and affective aspects of students toward corruption but the students should be invited to a deeper discussion and evaluate the social practices they are involved in if those practices should be abandoned or sustained. Therefore solving corruption is a multifactor approach.