Despite wide-ranging multidisciplinary scholarly research on rule-breaking (or rule- following), little is known about its temporal dynamics, and causal attribution remains an open question. This paper argues that rule-breaking is a complex phenomenon that feeds back into itself and demonstrates this with a lab experiment by comparing behavior of groups previously exposed to different levels of rule-breaking. Under the feedback hypoth- esis, those who had previously been exposed to substantial rule-breaking should exhibit a stronger tendency to break rules compared to those without such a history, everything else being the same. This is supported by experimental results, and further analysis also suggests a temporal interaction between the feedback effect and individual propensity to rule-following. These findings show that earlier decisions on rule-breaking can shape later decisions; that is, history and the dynamic feedback effect of rule-breaking matter. Methodological and practical implications are also discussed.