Justified ethicality: Observing desired counterfactuals modifies ethical perceptions and behavior

Preregistered Replication and Extension of "Moral Hypocrisy: Social Groups and the Flexibility of Virtue"

The tendency for people to consider themselves morally good while behaving selfishly is known as moral hypocrisy. Influential work by Valdesolo and DeSteno (2007) found evidence for intergroup moral hypocrisy such that people were more forgiving of transgressions when they were committed by an in-group member than an out-group member. We conducted two experiments to examine moral hypocrisy and group membership in an online paradigm with Prolific workers from the United States: a direct replication of the original work with minimal groups (N = 610; nationally representative) and a conceptual replication with political groups (N = 606; 50% Democrats and 50% Republicans). Although the results did not replicate the original findings, we observed evidence of in-group favoritism in minimal groups and out-group derogation in political groups. The current research finds mixed evidence of intergroup moral hypocrisy and has implications for understanding the contextual dependencies of intergroup bias and partisanship.

Beyond monetary value: how reward type drives cheating in a gender-judgment task

Background

Investigating the effects of monetary incentives on dishonest behavior provides valuable insights into human integrity and ethical decision-making processes. This study is conducted through the lens of self-concept maintenance theory.

Aim

The aim of this study is to examine the influence of different types of rewards (score-based vs. monetary) and their magnitude on dishonest behavior within a gender judgment task.

Method

Using a quantitative experimental design, this study involved 116 participants who were randomly assigned to conditions that differed in reward type (score or money) and magnitude (10 yuan vs. 50 yuan). Dishonest behavior was assessed using a gender judgment task with mechanisms to simulate conditions conducive to planned cheating.

Results

Results revealed significant differences in dishonesty rates between score and money conditions, with a higher proportion of dishonest participants observed in the score condition compared to the money condition. The timing of initial cheating was earlier in the score condition compared to the money condition. No significant differences were found in the proportion of dishonest participants, the cheating rate, or the timing of initial cheating across reward levels within either condition. The rate of cheating increased over time, suggesting a temporal dynamic in unethical decision making.

Conclusion

The study demonstrates that the nature of rewards significantly influences the likelihood of dishonest behavior, with intangible score-based rewards facilitating rationalizations for dishonesty more readily than tangible financial incentives. These findings enrich the understanding of moral psychology by highlighting the complex interplay between reward types, ethical rationalization, and the dynamics of dishonest behavior.

Cognitive empathy boosts honesty in children and young adolescents

Children and young adolescents often tend to behave dishonestly in order to serve their self-interests. This study focused on how empathic abilities affect children's tendency to deceive others. Deception is the act of causing others to form a false belief to get them to act in a way that serves the deceiver's interests. As such, it requires the ability to predict how others might use the provided information. In two experiments, 274 participants (aged 10-16 years) played a game in which they could send a deceptive message to another participant to boost their own payoff at the other player's expense. We measured participants' cognitive and emotional empathy using different measures. We found that a measure of cognitive empathy, namely the fantasy scale, was associated with less deception of another player when that other player was not identified and was presented only as "Player B." However, when Player B was identified by name, empathy did not predict deception. In such cases, the only factors affecting deception rates were the gain for the participant (higher possible gains lead to more deception) and loss to the other player (higher possible losses lead to less deception). Overall, the findings suggest that even by 11 years of age, children can understand the impact of their unethical behavior on another child and adjust their actions accordingly. However, when the other child is not identified, children need to possess high levels of cognitive empathy toward imagined individuals to resist the temptation to deceive the other child.

Why we should view the decision of medical trainees to cheat as the product of a person-by-situation interaction

BACKGROUND

Cheating during medical training is a delicate subject matter with varying opinions on the prevalence, causes and gravity of cheating during training.

PROPOSED FRAMEWORK

In this article, the authors suggest that the decision to cheat is best viewed as the product of a person-by-situation interaction rather than indicating inherent dishonesty and/or extrinsic motivation in those who participate in cheating. This framework can explain why individuals who would typically default to honesty may participate in cheating if there is perceived justification for cheating and where situational variables, such as ease of cheating, rewards for cheating and perceived risk associated with cheating, make the decision to cheat appear rational.

DISCUSSION

They discuss why the impression that there is a culture of cheating can provide perceived justification for medical trainees to cheat if they have the opportunity. They then describe how aspects of medical training and assessment may enable or hinder cheating by trainees. Consistent with the person-by-situation interaction framework, they contend that our response to cheating should include interventions directed at both the person who cheated and situational variables that enabled cheating. Recognising that some forms of cheating may be widespread, difficult to detect and contentious (such as the creation and use of exam reconstructs), their proposal for dealing with suspected and pervasive cheating is to identify and target enabling variables such that the decision to cheat becomes less rational. Their hope is that in so doing, we can gradually nudge trainees and the culture of medical training towards honesty.

Group Formation and the Evolution of Human Social Organization

Humans operate in groups that are oftentimes nested in multilayered collectives such as work units within departments and companies, neighborhoods within cities, and regions within nation states. With psychological science mostly focusing on proximate reasons for individuals to join existing groups and how existing groups function, we still poorly understand why groups form ex nihilo, how groups evolve into complex multilayered social structures, and what explains fission-fusion dynamics. Here we address group formation and the evolution of social organization at both the proximate and ultimate level of analysis. Building on models of fitness interdependence and cooperation, we propose that socioecologies can create positive interdependencies among strangers and pave the way for the formation of stable coalitions and groups through reciprocity and reputation-based partner selection. Such groups are marked by in-group bounded, parochial cooperation together with an array of social institutions for managing the commons, allowing groups to scale in size and complexity while avoiding the breakdown of cooperation. Our analysis reveals how distinct group cultures can endogenously emerge from reciprocal cooperation, shows that social identification and group commitment are likely consequences rather than causes of group cooperation, and explains when intergroup relations gravitate toward peaceful coexistence, integration, or conflict.

Psychological constraint on unethical behavior in team-based competition

A growing body of research contributes to our knowledge about unethical behavior. However, very little is known about how group-based competition shape members' unethical behavior. Building on social learning theory, we conducted three studies to reveal how group-based competition may affect individual's unethical behavior for their team. Study 1 and 2 are laboratory experiments in which participants were randomly assigned into groups of three members and engaged in group-based competition (or engaged in individual-based competition in an individual context) with monetary incentives. Different from individual-based competition where mean number of unethical behaviors for the self in the losing condition was larger than that in the winning condition, in group-based competition mean number of unethical behaviors in favor of group between the winning and the losing condition was not significantly different. Both studies also showed that there are less unethical behaviors in the group-based competition than in the individual-based competition. Study 2 further revealed that collective efficacy negatively associated with mean number of unethical behaviors in group-based competition. Study 3 was a field study with employees from bank subsidiaries working as teams, and results from their self-reported data confirm the relationship between collective efficacy and unethical behaviors observed in Study 2. Together, these results suggest that collective efficacy has the effect of curbing unethical behavior in group-based competition, thus contributing to the understanding of group-based experience on unethical behaviors.

I win it's fair, you win it's not. Selective heeding of merit in ambiguous settings

One's willingness to accept an outcome or even to correct it depends on whether the underlying procedure is deemed legitimate. We examine a modified version of the dictator game, where dictatorship is assigned by a fair procedure that is linked to the participant actions but in effect is completely random, to illustrate that this belief is not independent of the outcome and is self-serving in its nature. We also discuss the perceptions of fairness and merit as potential drivers of the observed behavioral phenomenon.

DENIAL: A conceptual framework to improve honesty nudges

Strategies to mitigate dishonesty have met with limited success, leading behavioral ethics scholars to call for a deeper understanding of the psychological mechanisms underlying dishonesty. In this article, I introduce a conceptual framework, DENIAL, that identifies four fundamental mechanisms, or justifications, which provide people a rationale to consider themselves as ethical while acting unethically. I derive these justifications from a review of scholarship within cognate fields, drawing on Moral Disengagement Theory and Neutralization Theory. I identify the victim (they Deserve it), the situation (I blame my Environment), the harm (I cause No Injury), and the social relationship (I have other ALlegiances) as fundamental justifications for dishonesty. I discuss how future mitigation strategies might harness these justifications to improve their efficacy.

The fear of conflict leads people to systematically avoid potentially valuable zero-sum situations

From interpersonal interactions to international arms races, game theorists and social scientists have long studied decision-making in zero-sum situations. Yet, what happens when people can freely choose whether to enter zero-sum situations in the first place? Thirteen studies (including five pre-registered) consistently document evidence for zero-sum aversion-the desire to avoid situations that are (or are believed to be) zero-sum. Across different contexts (economic games, market entry decisions, performance reviews, negotiations, job applications), samples (online participant pool, MBA students, community sample), and designs (within- and between-participant, real and hypothetical decisions), people avoid zero-sum situations that inversely link their and others' outcomes as well as refrain from putting others in such situations. Because people fear that zero-sum situations will be rife with conflict, they exhibit zero-sum aversion even when doing so is costly. Finally, we find that people require zero-sum situations to provide substantially higher payoffs (e.g., compensation) to overcome their zero-sum aversion. We conclude with a discussion of the implications for interpersonal and intergroup conflict.

Meta-nudging honesty: Past, present, and future of the research frontier

Achieving successful and long-lasting behavior change via nudging comes with challenges. This is particularly true when choice architects attempt to change behavior that is collectively harmful but individually beneficial, such as dishonesty. Here, we introduce the concept of "meta-nudging" and illustrate its potential benefits in the context of promoting honesty. The meta-nudging approach implies that instead of nudging end-users directly, one would nudge them indirectly via "social influencers." That is, one can arguably achieve better success by changing the behavior of those who have the ability to enforce other's behavior and norm adherence. We argue that this represents a promising new behavior change approach that helps overcome some of the challenges that the classical nudging approach has faced. We use the case of nudging honesty to develop the theoretical foundation of meta-nudging and discuss avenues for future work.

No evidence of moral licensing in a laboratory bribe-taking task

Moral licensing posits that previous moral acts increase the probability of behaving immorally in the future. According to this perspective, rejecting bribes, even because they are too small, would create a kind of “license” for taking (presumably larger) bribes in the future. On the other hand, the desire for consistency in behavior predicts that previous rejection of bribes will increase the probability of rejection for bribes offered in the future. Using a laboratory task modeling the decision to take a bribe, we examined how resisting and succumbing to the temptation to take a bribe affects later bribe-taking. Participants (N = 297) were offered either low bribes first and high bribes later or vice versa. Low bribes were in general rejected more often and the results showed some weak, nonsignificant evidence that bribe-taking may be influenced by the order of the sizes of offered bribes. However, there was no evidence of an increased probability of taking bribes after being offered the low bribes first and thus no evidence in support of the moral licensing effect.

Social norms and dishonesty across societies

Social norms have long been recognized as an important factor in curtailing antisocial behavior, and stricter prosocial norms are commonly associated with increased prosocial behavior. In this study, we provide evidence that very strict prosocial norms can have a perverse negative relationship with prosocial behavior. In laboratory experiments conducted in 10 countries across 5 continents, we measured the level of honest behavior and elicited injunctive norms of honesty. We find that individuals who hold very strict norms (i.e., those who perceive a small lie to be as socially unacceptable as a large lie) are more likely to lie to the maximal extent possible. This finding is consistent with a simple behavioral rationale. If the perceived norm does not differentiate between the severity of a lie, lying to the full extent is optimal for a norm violator since it maximizes the financial gain, while the perceived costs of the norm violation are unchanged. We show that the relation between very strict prosocial norms and high levels of rule violations generalizes to civic norms related to common moral dilemmas, such as tax evasion, cheating on government benefits, and fare dodging on public transportation. Those with very strict attitudes toward civic norms are more likely to lie to the maximal extent possible. A similar relation holds across countries. Countries with a larger fraction of people with very strict attitudes toward civic norms have a higher society-level prevalence of rule violations.

Morality in the flesh: on the link between bodily self-consciousness, moral identity and (dis)honest behaviour

The sense of owning a body (ownership) and controlling its actions (agency) are two main pillars of bodily self-consciousness (BSC). Although studies suggest that BSC signals and morality may be associated, whether such association has a positive or negative direction remains unclear. To investigate this issue, we conducted two pre-registered, online studies, in which a total of 1309 participants completed BSC- and morality-related questionnaires and undertook a task where they could cheat for monetary gain. We found that participants with high sense of ownership displayed high moral identity, which supports the notion that ownership is used to associate the self with positive characteristics. Moreover, high agency was associated with increased moral identity when sense of power is high. Results regarding deception are less clear, and might relate to the impact of COVID-19. Our results concerning moral identity may inspire policies that rely on changes of corporeal awareness to contrast immorality.

Morality in the flesh: on the link between bodily self-consciousness, moral identity and (dis)honest behaviour

The sense of owning a body (ownership) and controlling its actions (agency) are two main pillars of bodily self-consciousness (BSC). Although studies suggest that BSC signals and morality may be associated, whether such association has a positive or negative direction remains unclear. To investigate this issue, we conducted two pre-registered, online studies, in which a total of 1309 participants completed BSC- and morality-related questionnaires and undertook a task where they could cheat for monetary gain. We found that participants with high sense of ownership displayed high moral identity, which supports the notion that ownership is used to associate the self with positive characteristics. Moreover, high agency was associated with increased moral identity when sense of power is high. Results regarding deception are less clear, and might relate to the impact of COVID-19. Our results concerning moral identity may inspire policies that rely on changes of corporeal awareness to contrast immorality.

Morality in the flesh: on the link between bodily self-consciousness, moral identity and (dis)honest behaviour

The sense of owning a body (ownership) and controlling its actions (agency) are two main pillars of bodily self-consciousness (BSC). Although studies suggest that BSC signals and morality may be associated, whether such association has a positive or negative direction remains unclear. To investigate this issue, we conducted two pre-registered, online studies, in which a total of 1309 participants completed BSC- and morality-related questionnaires and undertook a task where they could cheat for monetary gain. We found that participants with high sense of ownership displayed high moral identity, which supports the notion that ownership is used to associate the self with positive characteristics. Moreover, high agency was associated with increased moral identity when sense of power is high. Results regarding deception are less clear, and might relate to the impact of COVID-19. Our results concerning moral identity may inspire policies that rely on changes of corporeal awareness to contrast immorality.

Personality and behavioral dishonesty

The past two decades have seen major developments in the study of behavioral (dis)honesty and its measurement as well as a surge of interest in the location of trait honesty within models of basic personality structure and the role of personality traits in behavioral dishonesty more generally. The present review provides an overview of the corresponding literature with a particular emphasis on recent developments and identifies the research questions for which we now have relatively reliable knowledge as well as those that will require future research.

Self-Serving Dishonesty Partially Substitutes Fairness in Motivating Cooperation When People Are Treated Fairly

Fairness is a key expectation in social interactions. Its violation leads to adverse reactions, including non-cooperation and dishonesty. The present study aimed to examine how (1) fair (unfair) treatment may drive cooperation (defection) and honesty (self-serving dishonesty), (2) dishonesty primes further moral disengagement and reduced cooperation, and (3) dishonesty weakens (substitutes) the effect of fairness on cooperation. The prisoner’s dilemma (Experiment 1 and 2) and die-rolling task (Experiment 2) were employed for capturing cooperation and dishonest behaviors, respectively. To manipulate perceived unfairness, participants were randomly assigned to play the prisoner’s dilemma game, where players either choose more cooperation (fair condition) or defection (unfair condition). Results of Experiment 1 (n = 102) suggested that participants perceive higher unfairness and behave less cooperatively when the other player primarily chooses defection. Results of Exp. 2 (n = 240) (a) confirmed Exp. 1 results, (b) showed that players in the unfair condition also show more self-serving dishonest behavior, and (c) that dishonest behavior weakens the effect of fairness on cooperation. Together, these results extended previous work by highlighting the self-serving lies when the opponent is fair trigger higher cooperation, presumably as a means to alleviate self-reflective moral emotions or restore justice.

Students' Perceptions of University Corruption in a Spanish Public University: A Path Analysis

Most research on corruption in educational settings has focused on a cross-national and macro-level analysis; however, to our knowledge, few papers have sought to explore individual perceptions that explain corruption in higher education. The present research aimed to disentangle students’ predictors of corrupt intention in a Spanish public university. A total of 933 undergraduate, postgraduate, and Ph.D. students filled out an online survey measuring four corruption scenarios: favoritism, bribery, fraud, and embezzlement. Path analysis (PA) revealed that justifiability, risk perception, and perceived prevalence of corruption were significant factors in predicting corrupt intention. Moreover, willingness to report a corrupt act was predicted by corrupt intention, justifiability, and risk perception. Corrupt behavior is a complex phenomenon explained not only by peers’ behavior, but also by their individual justifications and perception of risk. Education is not free of corruption, and universities must address this urgent problem in order to avoid future economic, societal, and ethical problems.

Under-Reporting of Self-Reported Medical Conditions in Aviation: A Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND: The applicants' self-declaration of medical history is crucial for safety. Some evidence indicates that under-reporting of medical conditions exists. However, the magnitude in a population of aviation personnel has not been reported earlier.METHODS: A total of 9941 applicants for medical certificate/attestation for aviation-related safety functions during the last 5 yr up to December 2019 were registered at the Civil Aviation Authority Norway. E-mail addresses were known for 9027 of these applicants, who were invited to participate in a web-based survey.RESULTS: Among the 1616 respondents, 726 (45%) were commercial pilots, 457 (28%) private pilots, 272 (17%) air traffic controllers, and the remaining were cabin crew or crew in aerodrome/helicopter flight information service (AFIS or HFIS, respectively). A total of 108 were initial applicants. The age group 50+ constituted the largest proportion of respondents (53%). Aeromedical certification in general was believed to improve flight safety "to a high" or "very high extent" by 64% of the respondents. A total of 188 individuals (12%) admitted having under-reported information related to one or more categories, including mental (3%) or physical health (4%), medications (2%), and drug use, including alcohol use (5%). Among these, 21 participants believed their own under-reporting "to some" or "to a high extent" affected flight safety. In total 50% of noninitial applicants reported that they knew colleagues who had under-reported information. Analyses revealed that being a commercial pilot showed a higher risk for under-reporting compared with other classes and the perception of aeromedical examiners in a supportive or authoritative role reduced the risk.CONCLUSIONS: Under-reporting of medical conditions could be significant in aviation. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the true extent of under-reporting and its impact on flight safety and what mitigating measures might be recommended.Strand T-E, Lystrup N, Martinussen M. Under-reporting of self-reported medical conditions in aviation: a cross-sectional survey. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2022; 93(4):376-383.

Experimental evidence of the effect of financial incentives and detection on dishonesty

We revisit two fundamental motivations of dishonesty: financial incentives and probability of detection. We use an ability-based real effort task in which participants who are college students in India can cheat by over reporting the number of puzzles they could solve in a given period of time. The puzzles are all unsolvable and this fact is unknown to participants. This design feature allows us to obtain the distribution of cheating outcomes at the individual level. Controlling for participant attributes, we find that introducing piece-rate financial incentives lowers both the likelihood and magnitude of cheating only for individuals with a positive probability of detection. On the other hand, a decrease in the probability of detection to zero increases magnitude of cheating only for individuals receiving piece-rate incentives. Moreover, we observe that participants cheat significantly even in the absence of piece-rate incentives indicating that affective benefits may determine cheating. Finally, an increase in own perceived wealth status vis-à-vis one’s peers is associated with a higher likelihood of cheating while feeling more satisfied with one’s current economic state is associated with a lower magnitude of cheating.

Generous with individuals and selfish to the masses

The seemingly rampant economic selfishness suggested by many recent corporate scandals is at odds with empirical results from behavioural economics, which demonstrate high levels of prosocial behaviour in bilateral interactions and low levels of dishonest behaviour. We design an experimental setting, the 'Big Robber' game, where a 'robber' can obtain a large personal gain by appropriating the earnings of a large group of 'victims'. In a large laboratory experiment (N = 640), more than half of all robbers took as much as possible and almost nobody declined to rob. However, the same participants simultaneously displayed standard, predominantly prosocial behaviour in Dictator, Ultimatum and Trust games. Thus, we provide direct empirical evidence showing that individual selfishness in high-impact decisions affecting a large group is compatible with prosociality in bilateral low-stakes interactions. That is, human beings can simultaneously be generous with others and selfish with large groups.

Gender Differences in Individual Dishonesty Profiles

Dishonesty has an enormous impact on all aspects of our society. It causes huge financial losses annually, so efforts to understand dishonest behavior have increased. However, one of the main questions yet to be answered is whether dishonesty varies according to gender. Do men behave more dishonestly than women? Although the literature points to a yes, there is still no consensus on the matter. We examined gender differences in dishonesty in a large sample (N = 2,452) using a model recently developed by Pascual-Ezama et al. It is a variation of the classic die-under-the-cup task. It enabled us to identify individual dishonesty profiles and look for gender differences between them. The results show that the men were more prone to behave dishonestly than women with small rewards, who seem satisfied without maximizing the potential reward. However, the differences vanished when there was no reward. The men also showed more radical dishonest behavior than the women. The results also suggest that gender differences might be shaped by factors other than gender.

Validity of an Instrument to Detect Cheating Confirmed by the Elicited Emotional Reactions

Cheating forms part of a complex emotional and cognitive process. However, although a relatively mundane phenomenon, instruments to evaluate cheating and its effects socially are scarce. This paper presents a five-stage approach aimed at providing validity to an instrument designed to assess cheating — specifically, its detection, and emotional reactions towards it once detected. An instrument was designed after (1) reviewing the relevant literature on cheating, in order to (2) design a bank of stimuli, (3) formulate a Delphi panel to judge the most coherent and pertinent ones, and (4) perform three pilot studies to adjust the final version of the instrument. Results from Stages 1 to 4 show that content validity was achieved for the Instrument for Detecting Cheating and its Emotional Reactions (INDETRAE, in Spanish: Instrumento para la Detección de Trampa y sus Reacciones Emocionales). Stimuli were grouped into five categories of 18 different scenarios, for a total of 90 vignettes: meaning, the INDETRAE is a 5-category, vignette-based questionnaire consisting of contrasting social cost-benefit scenarios, where the cheating situation affects an undefined, a first or a third person, and also a neutral category with no cheating. In Stage 5, several chi-squared tests (p < 0.0005) revealed significant differences between categories, proving that the instrument can indeed be used to detect cheating and to identify differentiated emotional reactions – for example, anger when there was detriment to a third person as opposed to neutral situations, or glad when there was a case of cheating which benefited the first person. The last stage counts as the first approximation to support construct validity of the INDETRAE. The most important contribution of this work consists in developing an instrument to detect cheating, confirmed by the resulting emotional reactions, which therefore demonstrate its validity.

Moral Threshold Model is Universal? Initial Evidence from China's Collectivist Culture

Purpose

People choose actions that maintain their moral self-regard. This paper explains how one’s moral actions influence moral self-regard. The moral threshold model (MTM) has been proposed by scholars and tested using a limited sample. However, whether the MTM is universally applicable among people is still unknown.

Participants and Methods

Our sample comprised 1761 individuals living in China, a collectivist culture, who were recruited to test the two main hypotheses of the MTM. Participants engaged in a hypothetical investment task.

Results

1) When the beneficiary was a prosocial cause, participants showed stronger preferences for smaller guaranteed positive payouts over larger uncertain ones; 2) as compared to making decisions for charities, when a participant made decisions exclusively for themselves, the maximum potential benefit was more likely to influence participant behavior.

Conclusion

The current study provides initial evidence for the validity of using the worst outcome avoidance (WOA) hypothesis of MTM among members of China’s collectivist culture, indicating that the WOA hypothesis of MTM may have universal application.

A Review of Functions of Speculative Thinking

Speculative thinking refers to thinking about past or future possibilities; it includes counterfactual thinking, prefactual thinking, and other types. In this narrative review, we discuss the traditional function of speculative thinking in improving future performance (i.e., the preparatory function). We also explore several non-preparatory functions of speculative thinking that have not been widely covered, namely the functions of conveying information and of supporting lying. In addition, we address temporal asymmetry; one perspective focuses on psychological distance in speculative thinking about the past and future, while another focuses on temporal asymmetry and reality/hypothetical differences in the preparatory function of speculative thinking. Overall, this review suggests that a broader functional theory is needed to address non-preparatory functions and the traditional preparatory function. Such a theory should cover all speculative thinking about the past and future rather than simply counterfactual thinking.

Revenge is not blind: Testing the ability of retribution to justify dishonesty

In two studies, we tested the power of revenge as a justification mechanism that enables people to cheat with a clear conscience. Specifically, we explored the effects of prior dishonesty and unfairness towards participants on their subsequent moral behavior, as well as the physiological arousal associated with it. To this end, we employed a two-phase procedure. In the first phase, participants played one round of a bargaining game (the Ultimatum game in Study 1 and the Dictator game in Study 2) in which we manipulated whether the players had been treated (un)fairly and (dis)honestly by their opponent. In the second phase, they did a perceptual task that allowed them to cheat for monetary gain at the expense of their opponent from the first phase. In Study 1, participants also took a lie detector test to assess whether their dishonesty in the second phase could be detected. The behavioral results in both studies indicated that the opponent’s dishonesty was a stronger driver than the opponent’s unfairness for cheating as a form of retaliation. However, the physiological arousal results suggest that feeling mistreated in general (and not just cheated) allowed the participants to get revenge by cheating the offender while dismissing their associated guilt feelings.

Do Not Tell Me More; You Are Honest: A Preconceived Honesty Bias

According to the previous literature, only a few papers found better accuracy than a chance to detect dishonesty, even when more information and verbal cues (VCs) improve precision in detecting dishonesty. A new classification of dishonesty profiles has recently been published, allowing us to study if this low success rate happens for all people or if some people have higher predictive ability. This paper aims to examine if (dis)honest people can detect better/worse (un)ethical behavior of others. With this in mind, we designed one experiment using videos from one of the most popular TV shows in the UK where contestants make a (dis)honesty decision upon gaining or sharing a certain amount of money. Our participants from an online MTurk sample (N = 1,582) had to determine under different conditions whether the contestants would act in an (dis)honest way. Three significant results emerged from these two experiments. First, accuracy in detecting (dis)honesty is not different than chance, but submaximizers (compared to maximizers) and radical dishonest people (compare to non-radicals) are better at detecting honesty, while there is no difference in detecting dishonesty. Second, more information and VCs improve precision in detecting dishonesty, but honesty is better detected using only non-verbal cues (NVCs). Finally, a preconceived honesty bias improves specificity (honesty detection accuracy) and worsens sensitivity (dishonesty detection accuracy).

Moral currencies: Explaining corrupt collaboration

Overall, people want to behave ethically. In some cases, temptation steers them away from ethical behavior. In other cases, purely ethical behavior is not possible, because the same behavior entails both ethical and unethical consequences. For example, collaboration with others may require people to be dishonest. We suggest that to justify their choices in such cases, people engage in a moral calculus in which they consider ethical values and behaviors as moral currencies, which can be traded for each other. This view is consistent with previous accounts that highlight the licensing effect that ethical actions can have on subsequent unethical actions when ethical and unethical actions are temporally distant and independent from each other, and also with cases where the same action has both positive and negative ethical value. We highlight the case of corrupt collaboration, where people often forgo honesty in favor of self- and group-serving collaboration, as one where moral currencies provide a useful framework for analysis and generation of research questions.

Why do people follow social norms?

Norms prescribe how to make decisions in social situations and play a crucial role in sustaining cooperative relationships and coordinating collective action. However, following norms often requires restricting behavior, demanding to curtail selfishness, or suppressing personal goals. This raises the question why people adhere to norms. We review recent theories and empirical findings that aim at explaining why people follow norms even in private, when violations are difficult to detect and are not sanctioned. We discuss theories of norm internalization, social and self-image concerns, and social learning (i.e. preferences conditional on what others do/believe). Finally, we present two behavioral, incentivized tasks that can be used to elicit norms and measure the individual propensity to follow them.

Functional connectivity between the caudate and medial prefrontal cortex reflects individual honesty variations in adults and children

Deception emerges in early childhood and prevails in adults. Activation patterns in previous adults' task-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), though sensitive to state honesty on a specific decision, are less reliable reflecting trait honesty. Besides of state honesty, most previous neuroimaging studies about dishonesty suffer the generalization problem due to the major focus on adults with children unexplored. To investigate honesty associated functional brain networks variations, 98 healthy adults (Age: 18-28 y.o.; 49 males and 49 females) were invited to participate in a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rfMRI) study (Study 1). We investigated how functional connections between the caudate and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) change among adults who differ in self-reported trait honesty. Results showed that adults with higher trait honesty have increased functional connectivity from the caudate to the mPFC, which is identified as an honesty-related hub region in global brain connectivity analysis and connects more tightly to a wide range of brain regions including the amygdala. Study 2 compared functional connectivity between children with high vs. low lying frequencies (Age: 6-16 y.o.; 61 males and 39 females) based on a publicly accessible database of rfMRI. Consistent with findings in adults, increased functional connectivity from the caudate to the mPFC was found in less frequently lying children. Despite different honesty indicators of self-reported honesty trait in adults and parent-reported lying patterns in children, consistent findings have been noted in the two samples with regards to functional connectivity variations between reward-related and self-related brain regions. These findings suggest functional connectivity alterations between the caudate and the mPFC contribute to honesty variations in both adults and children.

Rationalizing Inconsistent Consumer Behavior. Understanding Pathways That Lead to Negative Spillover of Pro-environmental Behaviors in Daily Life

Ideally, pro-environmental consumer behavior leads to a lower impact on the environment. However, due to negative behavioral spillovers environmentally friendly behavior could lead to an overall higher environmental impact if subsequent environmentally unfriendly behavior occurs. In this exploratory interview study we focused on two pathways leading to negative spillover: a psychological path (perceived effort, moral licensing) and an economic path (rebound effects). We wanted to gain insight into people's motivations to behave environmentally unfriendly and to explore people's level of awareness of both pathways. Our results indicate that pro-environmental behaviors that are associated with higher effort are performed less frequently, and that when people do not perform these behaviors they associate them with higher effort levels. When people perceive behaviors as more effortful they increasingly seem to use arguments to motivate and rationalize why performing the behavior is difficult or impossible. Moreover, we found that although some people can imagine that moral licensing and rebound effects could occur and can provide examples from their own lives, most people assess these concepts as not rational. People seem unaware of the relation between a first pro-environmental behavior (PEB) and a subsequent behavior, and therefore inconsistencies in behavior go unnoticed. As people are good at rationalizing why they do not perform specific PEBs, they in general feel satisfied with their own pro-environmental actions. In order to discourage negative spillovers, we describe a number of approaches and research ideas aimed at taking away the grounds for rationalization.

Do Advertising Pieces that Portray Brazilian Jeitinho Influence Dishonest Behavior?

Abstract This research aimed at investigating whether watching Brazilian advertising pieces that portray a sociocultural behavioral pattern called Brazilian jeitinho would influence participant’s subsequent behavior. One carried out an experiment in which 200 subjects watched and assessed three advertisement pieces. Upon recruitment, participants were informed that they would be taking part in a raffle for a gift card. The number of tickets received per participant was defined by a die-under-cup task. The more tickets they obtained, the higher the chance to receive the prize, providing an incentive to cheat. Afterwards, respondents took part in a task that defined the number of tickets that each would receive to participate in the raffle. Independent variables consisted in the manipulation of priming of jeitinho (video content: jeitinho or neutral) and privacy of the task (with or without privacy). On the other hand, the dependent variable consisted in the result obtained when participants rolled the dices that defined the number of tickets. One found a significant difference between the groups in which privacy was manipulated, indicating that the groups that performed the task aimed at measuring dishonesty with privacy actually tended to report lower values than the ones actually obtained, entailing an effect of contrast. This finding suggests that the implementation of public policies that utilize propaganda that portrays Brazilian jeitinho could reduce engagement in dishonest behavior among Brazilians.

Bending Our Ethics Code

Abstract. Deception of research participants has long been and remains a hot-button issue in the behavioral sciences. At the same time, the field of psychology is fortunate to have an ethics code to rely on in determining whether and how to use and report on deception of participants. Despite ongoing normative controversies, the smallest common denominator among psychologists is that deception ought to be a last resort – to be used only when there is no other defensible way to study a question or phenomenon. Going beyond previous normative discussions or inquiries into the mere prevalence of deception, we ask the fundamental question whether common practice is compatible with this interpretation of our field’s ethical standards. Findings from an empirical literature review – focusing on the feasibility of nondeceptive alternative procedures and the presence of explicit justifications for the use of deception – demonstrate that there is a notable gap between the last resort interpretation of our ethical standards and common practice in psychological research. The findings are discussed with the aim of identifying viable ways in which researchers, journal editors, and the scientific associations crafting our ethics codes may narrow this gap.

Cognitive strategies for managing cheating: The roles of cognitive abilities in managing moral shortcuts

Cheating and immorality are highly researched phenomena, likely due to their great impact. However, little research has examined the real-time cognitive mechanisms that are involved in cheating and conflict management. Much of the cheating research to date concentrates on binary cheating; however, in more prevalent real-world scenarios, people often engage in more ambiguous self-serving mistakes. To execute such self-serving decisions, one may make use of conflict-management strategies to help balance an internal struggle between gain and self-concept. We propose that to enact such strategies one must employ sufficient cognitive resources. To test this, we employed a simple effortful control task that allows for comparisons of gain and no-gain errors, isolating self-serving mistakes while recording gaze and response-time measures. Findings revealed that individuals can make use of conflict management strategies that mimicked errors made inadvertently. Two strategies included gaze avert and quick response times during gain blocks, whereby participants simulated out-of-control-like behaviors while engaging in self-serving mistakes, plausibly as a method of self-justification. Strategy use was dependent upon individuals' cognitive abilities. Participants reporting high inhibitory control abilities were able to use gaze aversion to engage in self-serving mistakes, while those reporting high attention resources were able to employ faster response times when making more profitable errors. Taken together, this paper contributes to (1) the debate on whether honesty/dishonesty is the dominant response, (2) the debate on self-control and inhibition on cheating, and (3) the understudied area of cognitive justifications to maintain a positive self-concept.

Employee's lying behavior and the role of self-awareness

Purpose

Employee’s lying behavior has become ubiquitous at work, and managers are keen to know what can be done to curb such behavior. Managers often apply anti-lying strategies in their management and, in particular, the role of self-awareness on lying intervention has drawn academic attention recently. Drawing on multi-disciplinary literature, this study aims to investigate the efficacy of self-awareness in reducing lying behavior.

Design/methodology/approach

Following the perspectives of positivism and deductive reasoning, a quasi-experimental research approach was adopted. Employees from Dijon, France were recruited as research participants. Based on the literature, different conditions (scenario manipulation) were designed and implemented in the laboratory, in which participants were exposed to pre-set lying opportunities and their responses were analyzed accordingly.

Findings

Unlike prior studies which praised the merits of self-awareness, the authors found that self-awareness did not decrease lying behavior, not encouraging the confession of lying either. Employees actually lied more when they believed other employees were lying.

Practical implications

This study suggests managers not to rely on employee’s self-awareness; rather, the concept of self-awareness should be incorporated into the work ethics, and managers should schedule regular workshops to keep employees informed of the importance of ethics. When employees are regularly reminded of the ethics and appreciate its importance, their intention of lying is more likely to decrease.

Originality/value

To the best of the atuhors’ knowledge, the current research is the first in its kind to investigate lying intervention of employees in the laboratory setting. Research findings have brought new insights into the lying intervention literature, which has important implication on the implementation of anti-lying strategies.

Rule Following Mitigates Collaborative Cheating and Facilitates the Spreading of Honesty Within Groups

Compared with working alone, interacting in groups can increase dishonesty and give rise to collaborative cheating-the joint violation of honesty. At the same time, collaborative cheating emerges some but not all of the time, even when dishonesty is not sanctioned and economically rational. Here, we address this conundrum. We show that people differ in their extent to follow arbitrary and costly rules and observe that "rule-followers" behave more honestly than "rule-violators." Because rule-followers also resist the temptation to engage in collaborative cheating, dyads and groups with at least one high rule-follower have fewer instances of coordinated violations of honesty. Whereas social interaction can lead to a "social slippery slope" of increased cheating, rule-abiding individuals mitigate the emergence and spreading of collaborative cheating, leading to a transmission advantage of honesty. Accordingly, interindividual differences in rule following provide a basis through which honest behavior can persist.

Motivated Interpretations of Deceptive Information

We examine whether people seek information that might help them make sense of others' dishonest behavior. Participants were told that a hypothetical partner (either a friend or a stranger) had engaged in a task in which the partner could lie to boost their earnings at the expense of the participant's earnings. Participants were less likely to search for information that can justify potential dishonest behavior conducted by a friend than by a stranger (Experiment 1). When participants knew for certain that their partners had lied to them, they were less likely to assume that that the lie was justified when told that the partner was a friend rather than a stranger (Experiment 2). The results imply that people are more likely to search for information that may reduce the severity of possible dishonest behavior when a stranger, rather than a friend, is responsible for the behavior.