IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Are White Lies as Innocuous as We Think?

  • Jennifer J. Argo
  • Baba Shiv
Registered author(s):

    This research examines the implications of telling an “innocent” white lie after a negative interpersonal encounter. We propose that if a white lie falls outside an acceptable range of dishonesty, cognitive dissonance will arise and produce negative affect. Deceivers will then be motivated to reduce the dissonance and will do so by engaging in behaviors that favor the wrongdoer with potentially negative consequences for the self. We test our conceptualization across three studies. In study 1, we explore the impact of one factor that determines whether a white lie falls outside the acceptable range of dishonesty—the salience of the norm of honesty. In studies 2 and 3, we examine the role of two factors, affect certainty and source certainty, that are predicted to moderate the impact of the negative affect on deceiver’s downstream judgments and behaviors toward the target of the white lie.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Consumer Research.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 6 ()
    Pages: 1093 - 1102

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:doi:10.1086/661640
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jconrs:doi:10.1086/661640. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.