NEW research suggests our morals around money may be changing, with the rise of the internet and new technology also having an impact.

The study from the Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment (CISI) found that "wardrobing" - where someone buys an item of clothing, wears it, then returns it to the retailer for a refund - may be becoming more acceptable.

One in three 18 to 29-year-olds surveyed said was it acceptable to buy, wear and return something they have bought online. A smaller proportion (11 per cent) of people aged between 50 and 59 years old believe doing this is acceptable, the survey found.

The research looked at the relationship between "faceless technology" and someone's willingness to behave less ethically by attempting to get their money back when they know they are not really entitled to do so. The findings suggest that behaving unethically may be deemed more acceptable when it affects a company or large commercial entity, rather than a person.

While 17 per cent of people surveyed would find it acceptable to wear and return an item they had bought online, only 11 per cent would find it acceptable to do this at a local shop.

The idea of taking back in person something that had been worn was less acceptable than returning it online across the generations, with 23 per cent of 18 to 29-year-olds and six per cent of 50 to 59-year-olds finding it acceptable to return an item in person having worn it once.

The research found that men and women seem equally inclined towards buying and returning clothing they have bought online, with both 17 per cent of men and women finding this acceptable.

But there were situations where men appeared to be willing to behave less ethically than women to put themselves at a financial advantage. Nearly one in three men surveyed (29 per cent) thought it would be acceptable not to report a mistake a bank had made in their favour, compared with 19 per cent of women.

Meanwhile, 17 per cent of men thought it was acceptable to go over the top when it comes to making an insurance claim. Women were less inclined to think it is acceptable to inflate an insurance claim, with 11 per cent finding it acceptable.

The survey also asked people how acceptable they would find it if, following a meal with a group of friends, they noticed the waiter had left off a round of drinks bought at the bar beforehand when adding up the bill.

Two-fifths (39 per cent) of people would find it acceptable to say nothing and pay the amount shown on the bill. Again, there were age variations, with 51 per cent of 18 to 29-year-olds versus 35 per cent of 50 to 59-year-olds finding this acceptable.

Rebecca Aston, integrity and ethics manager at the CISI, said this scenario reveals more about human nature, with a "strength in numbers" approach backed up by a group when we are presented with a moral dilemma.

Simon Culhane, chief executive of the CISI, added: "This survey has demonstrated that ethical behaviour and motivation on a day-to-day basis can be affected by gender, age and money."

He said that technology is also a significant factor, as it has removed the need to interact face to face, which, he said, "could point to our becoming desensitised to the person behind the corporate entity, firm or online retailer".