IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijpsjl/v13y2021i1p20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lying for Bonuses

Author

Listed:
  • Junda Chang

Abstract

This study aims to determine whether being in a group setting makes lying easier through the diffusion of responsibility. Participants in three separate conditions, two paired and one isolated control, were asked to roll dice and report results. Participants also had the incentive of earning extra money if the reported number was a four, regardless of the truthfulness of the response. The results showed that participants overwhelmingly reported rolling a four, statistically indicating that many chose to lie. Additionally, one of the two group conditions proved to have significantly higher rates of reported lying than the individual condition (with the other group condition directionally higher but not significantly). The findings suggest that people are more likely to engage in immoral behavior when placed in a group setting as opposed to when acting independently.

Suggested Citation

  • Junda Chang, 2021. "Lying for Bonuses," International Journal of Psychological Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijpsjl:v:13:y:2021:i:1:p:20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijps/article/download/0/0/44630/47176
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijps/article/view/0/44630
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A Falk & T Neuber & N Szech, 2020. "Diffusion of Being Pivotal and Immoral Outcomes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(5), pages 2205-2229.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marie Claire Villeval, 2019. "Comportements (non) éthiques et stratégies morales," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 70(6), pages 1021-1046.
    2. Lasse S. Stötzer & Florian Zimmermann, 2022. "A Note on Motivated Cognition and Discriminatory Beliefs," CESifo Working Paper Series 10019, CESifo.
    3. Feess, Eberhard & Schilling, Thomas & Timofeyev, Yuriy, 2023. "Misreporting in teams with individual decision making: The impact of information and communication," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 509-532.
    4. Casal, Sandro & Fallucchi, Francesco & Quercia, Simone, 2019. "The role of morals in three-player ultimatum games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 67-79.
    5. Behnk, Sascha & Hao, Li & Reuben, Ernesto, 2022. "Shifting normative beliefs: On why groups behave more antisocially than individuals," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Saltuk Özerturk & Huseyin Yildirim, 2019. "Credit Attribution and Collaborative Work," Departmental Working Papers 1907, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
    7. Marta Serra-Garcia & Nora Szech, 2022. "The (In)Elasticity of Moral Ignorance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4815-4834, July.
    8. Huck, Steffen & Kajackaite, Agne & Szech, Nora, 2021. "Editorial: Honesty and Moral Behavior in Economic Games," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12, pages 1-1.
    9. Shuguang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2024. "Dishonesty as a collective‐risk social dilemma," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 223-241, January.
    10. Nicola Maaser & Thomas Stratmann, 2021. "Costly Voting in Weighted Committees: The case of moral costs," Economics Working Papers 2021-11, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    11. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2020. "Expressive Voting vs. Self-Serving Ignorance," Working Papers 2020-33, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    12. Feess, Eberhard & Kerzenmacher, Florian & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2023. "Morally questionable decisions by groups: Guilt sharing and its underlying motives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 380-400.
    13. Bartling, Björn & Özdemir, Yagiz, 2023. "The limits to moral erosion in markets: Social norms and the replacement excuse," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 143-160.
    14. Endre Kildal Iversen & Kristine Grimsrud & Yohei Mitani & Henrik Lindhjem, 2022. "Altruist Talk May (also) Be Cheap: Revealed Versus Stated Altruism as a Predictor in Stated Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 681-708, November.
    15. Feess, Eberhard & Kerzenmacher, Florian & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2020. "Moral Transgressions by Groups: What Drives Individual Voting Behavior?," IZA Discussion Papers 13383, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Silvia Saccardo & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2020. "Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion," CESifo Working Paper Series 8529, CESifo.
    17. Katharina Momsen & Markus Ohndorf, 2023. "Expressive voting versus information avoidance: experimental evidence in the context of climate change mitigation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 194(1), pages 45-74, January.
    18. Stehr, Frauke & Werner, Peter, 2021. "Making Up for Harming Others — An Experiment on Voluntary Compensation Behavior," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242396, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Julio J. Elías & Nicola Lacetera & Mario Macis, 2019. "Paying for Kidneys? A Randomized Survey and Choice Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2855-2888, August.
    20. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant & Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo, 2020. "Observability, Social Proximity, and the Erosion of Norm Compliance," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 009, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijpsjl:v:13:y:2021:i:1:p:20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.