IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/iastwp/30643.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Empathy Beget Guile? Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Daniel L.

Abstract

Some theories about the positive impact of markets on morality suggest that competition increases empathy, not between competitors, but between them and third parties. However, empathy may be a necessary evolutionary antecedent to guile, which is when someone knows what the other person wants and intentionally deceives him or her, and deception may have evolved as a means of exploiting empathy. This paper examines how individuals primed for empathy behave towards third parties in a simple economic game of deception. It reports the results of a data entry experiment in an online labor market. Individuals enter data randomized to be a prime for empathy, for guile, or a control. Empathy is then measured using a Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and guile is measured using a simple economic game. Individuals primed for empathy become less deceptive towards third parties. Individuals primed for guile become less likely to perceive that deceiving an individual is unfair in a vignette. These results are robust to a variety of controls and to restricting to workers who entered the prime accurately. These findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis that empathy causes guile and suggests that empathy may cause those who are making judgements to become less deceptive.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Daniel L., 2016. "Does Empathy Beget Guile? Experimental Evidence," IAST Working Papers 16-42, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    • Handle: RePEc:tse:iastwp:30643
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://iast.fr/pub/30643
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.iast.fr/sites/default/files/wp/wp_chen1642.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (II): Distribution," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 2, number mill1848-2.
    2. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    3. Uri Gneezy, 2005. "Deception: The Role of Consequences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 384-394, March.
    4. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, June.
    5. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (III): Exchange," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 3, number mill1848-3.
    6. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (V): On the Influence of Government," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 5, number mill1848-5.
    7. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (I): Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number mill1848-1.
    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. Jacobsen, Catrine & Piovesan, Marco, 2016. "Tax me if you can: An artifactual field experiment on dishonesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 7-14.
    2. Ariel Goldszmidt & John A. List & Robert D. Metcalfe & Ian Muir & V. Kerry Smith & Jenny Wang, 2020. "The Value of Time in the United States: Estimates from Nationwide Natural Field Experiments," NBER Working Papers 28208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ian Keay, 2019. "Protection for maturing industries: Evidence from Canadian trade patterns and trade policy, 1870–1913," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(4), pages 1464-1496, November.
    4. Wurm, Laura, 2021. "Strangling speculation: The effect of the 1903 Viennese futures trading ban," QUCEH Working Paper Series 21-09, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's University Centre for Economic History.
    5. Tsoulfidis, Lefteris & Alexiou, Constantinos & Parthenidis, Thanasis, 2015. "Revisiting profit persistence and the stock market in Japan," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 10-24.
    6. Ian Moffatt, 2013. "Measuring sustainable development," Chapters, in: M. A. Quaddus & M. A.B. Siddique (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development Planning, chapter 3, pages 39-60, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Simone Pellegrino & Guido Perboli & Giovanni Squillero, 2019. "Balancing the equity-efficiency trade-off in personal income taxation: an evolutionary approach," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(1), pages 37-64, April.
    8. Jerry Kirkpatrick, 2004. "Reisman's Net Consumption, Net Investment Theory of Aggregate Profit," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(3), pages 627-646, July.
    9. Stefano Zamagni & Vera Zamagni, 2010. "Cooperative Enterprise," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13842.
    10. Yongzheng Liu & Haibo Feng, 2015. "Tax structure and corruption: cross-country evidence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 162(1), pages 57-78, January.
    11. Roy, Saktinil & Kemme, David M., 2020. "The run-up to the global financial crisis: A longer historical view of financial liberalization, capital inflows, and asset bubbles," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. B. Ravikumar & Raymond Riezman & Yuzhe Zhang, 2022. "Private Information and Optimal Infant Industry Protection," Working Papers 2022-013, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    13. Han Gao & Mariano Kulish & Juan Pablo Nicolini, 2020. "Two Illustrations of the Quantity Theory of Money Reloaded," Working Papers 774, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    14. Leeson, Peter T., 2007. "Better off stateless: Somalia before and after government collapse," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 689-710, December.
    15. Wu, Yiyun & Zhu, Xiwei & Groenewold, Nicolaas, 2019. "The determinants and effectiveness of industrial policy in china: A study based on Five-Year Plans," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 225-242.
    16. Weinzierl, Matthew, 2014. "The promise of positive optimal taxation: normative diversity and a role for equal sacrifice," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 128-142.
    17. Kuś Agnieszka, 2020. "The Importance of Innovation in the Development of Polish Business Gazelles," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 28(1), pages 32-51, March.
    18. Alessandro De Matteis, 2019. "Decomposing the anthropogenic causes of climate change," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 165-179, February.
    19. Rosolino A. Candela & Vincent J. Geloso, 2020. "The Lighthouse Debate and the Dynamics of Interventionism," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 289-314, September.
    20. Heindl, Peter & Löschel, Andreas, 2015. "Social implications of green growth policies from the perspective of energy sector reform and its impact on households," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-012, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Normative Commitments; Other-Regarding Preferences; Empathy; Deception; Guile;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D64 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Altruism; Philanthropy; Intergenerational Transfers
    • K00 - Law and Economics - - General - - - General (including Data Sources and Description)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:tse:iastwp:30643. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iasttfr.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.