IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tse/wpaper/30579.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," TSE Working Papers 16-684, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  • Handle: RePEc:tse:wpaper:30579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.tse-fr.eu/sites/default/files/TSE/documents/doc/wp/2016/wp_tse_684.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 (I): Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number mill1848-1.
    7. 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.
    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," Working Papers 2020-179, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    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. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. B. Ravikumar & Raymond Riezman & Yuzhe Zhang, 2022. "Private Information and Optimal Infant Industry Protection," Working Papers 2022-013, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, revised 18 Apr 2024.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. V. A. Mau, 2022. "Trends in Economic Science: Discussions of the Paths of Russian Modernization in the 19th–20th Centuries," Studies on Russian Economic Development, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 506-512, October.
    14. Zhao, Jiaxin & Mattauch, Linus, 2022. "When standards have better distributional consequences than carbon taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    15. Prabirjit Sarkar, 2001. "The North-South terms of trade debate: a re-examination," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 1(4), pages 309-327, October.
    16. Heindl, Peter & Löschel, Andreas, 2015. "Social implications of green growth policies from the perspective of energy sector reform and its impact on households," CAWM Discussion Papers 81, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    17. Sergio Tezanos V�zquez, 2015. "Distributive Justice in Aid for Development," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 310-329, September.
    18. Jon D. Wisman & Kevin W. Capehart, 2010. "Creative Destruction, Economic Insecurity, Stress, and Epidemic Obesity," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 936-982, July.
    19. Alan Piper, 2015. "Europe’s Capital Cities and the Happiness Penalty: An Investigation Using the European Social Survey," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 103-126, August.
    20. Karbowski, Adam & Prokop, Jacek, 2012. "Kontrowersje związane z ekonomicznym uzasadnieniem ochrony patentowej [Controversies over the economic justifications for patent protection]," MPRA Paper 73619, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:wpaper:30579. 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/tsetofr.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.