IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/96640.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lying in Two Dimensions and Moral Spillovers

Author

Listed:
  • Geraldes, Diogo
  • Heinicke, Franziska
  • Rosenkranz, Stephanie

Abstract

The expanding literature on lying has exclusively considered lying behavior within a one-dimensional context. While this has been an important first step, many real-world contexts involve the possibility of simultaneously lying in more than one dimension (e.g., reporting one’s income and expenses in a tax declaration). In this paper, we experimentally investigate individual lying behavior in both one- and two-dimensional contexts to understand whether the multi-dimensionality of a decision affects lying behavior. In the one-dimensional treatment, participants are asked to roll two dice in one hand and to report the sum of both dice. In the two-dimensional treatment, participants are asked to roll two dice at the same time, but one in each hand, and to report the two dice separately. Our paper provides the first evidence regarding lying behavior in a multi-dimensional context. Using a two-dimensional die-roll task, we show that participants lie partially between dimensions, which results in greater overreporting of the lower outcome die. These findings suggest a thought-provoking policy to tackle the infamous societal challenge of tax fraud: Tax report checks should focus on the item(s) for which a taxpayer profile hints at higher self-benefits in case of misreporting.

Suggested Citation

  • Geraldes, Diogo & Heinicke, Franziska & Rosenkranz, Stephanie, 2019. "Lying in Two Dimensions and Moral Spillovers," MPRA Paper 96640, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:96640
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/96640/1/MPRA_paper_96640.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Friesen, Lana & Gangadharan, Lata, 2013. "Designing self-reporting regimes to encourage truth telling: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 90-102.
    2. Dolan, Paul & Galizzi, Matteo M., 2015. "Like ripples on a pond: Behavioral spillovers and their implications for research and policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-16.
    3. Dufwenberg, Martin & Dufwenberg, Martin A., 2018. "Lies in disguise – A theoretical analysis of cheating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 248-264.
    4. Daylian M. Cain & George Loewenstein & Don A. Moore, 2005. "The Dirt on Coming Clean: Perverse Effects of Disclosing Conflicts of Interest," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Jannis Engel & Nora Szech, 2017. "A Little Good is Good Enough: Ethical Consumption, Cheap Excuses, and Moral Self-Licensing," Working Papers 2017-025, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    6. Engel, Jannis & Szech, Nora, 2017. "A little good is good enough: Ethical consumption, cheap excuses, and moral self-licensing," Working Paper Series in Economics 102, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
    7. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim & Marie Claire Villeval, 2016. "Loss Aversion and lying behavior: Theory, estimation and empirical evidence," Working Papers halshs-01404333, HAL.
    8. Engel, Jannis & Szech, Nora, 2017. "A little good is good enough: Ethical consumption, cheap excuses, and moral self-licensing," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2017-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    9. Doru Cojoc & Adrian Stoian, 2014. "Dishonesty and charitable behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 717-732, December.
    10. Kiryl Khalmetski & Dirk Sliwka, 2019. "Disguising Lies—Image Concerns and Partial Lying in Cheating Games," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 79-110, November.
    11. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    12. Johannes Abeler & Daniele Nosenzo & Collin Raymond, 2019. "Preferences for Truth‐Telling," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1115-1153, July.
    13. Barron, Kai & Stüber, Robert & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2019. "Motivated motive selection in the lying-dictator game," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2019-303, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Ploner, Matteo & Regner, Tobias, 2013. "Self-image and moral balancing: An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 374-383.
    15. Uri Gneezy & Agne Kajackaite & Joel Sobel, 2018. "Lying Aversion and the Size of the Lie," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 419-453, February.
    16. Ayelet Gneezy & Alex Imas & Amber Brown & Leif D. Nelson & Michael I. Norton, 2012. "Paying to Be Nice: Consistency and Costly Prosocial Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 179-187, January.
    17. Jannis Engel & Nora Szech, 2017. "A Little Good is Good Enough: Ethical Consumption, Cheap Excuses, and Moral Self-Licensing," CESifo Working Paper Series 6434, CESifo.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Casal, Sandro & Filippin, Antonio, 2020. "The Effect of Observing Multiple Private Information Outcomes on the Inclination to Cheat," IZA Discussion Papers 13689, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Diogo Geraldes & Franziska Heinicke & Duk Gyoo Kim, 2020. "Big and Small Lies," CESifo Working Paper Series 8142, CESifo.

    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. Barron, Kai, 2019. "Lying to appear honest," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2019-307, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    2. Huber, Christoph & Huber, Jürgen, 2020. "Bad bankers no more? Truth-telling and (dis)honesty in the finance industry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 472-493.
    3. Ek, Claes, 2017. "Some causes are more equal than others? The effect of similarity on substitution in charitable giving," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 45-62.
    4. Dufwenberg, Martin & Dufwenberg, Martin A., 2018. "Lies in disguise – A theoretical analysis of cheating," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 248-264.
    5. Garbarino, Ellen & Slonim, Robert & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Loss aversion and lying behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 379-393.
    6. Benistant, Julien & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Unethical behavior and group identity in contests," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 128-155.
    7. Ek, Claes, 2015. "Prosocial Behavior and Policy Spillovers: A Multi-Activity Approach," Working Papers 2015:26, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 11 Sep 2017.
    8. Rahwan, Zoe & Hauser, Oliver P. & Kochanowska, Ewa & Fasolo, Barbara, 2018. "High stakes: A little more cheating, a lot less charity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 276-295.
    9. Tim Lohse & Salmai Qari, 2019. "Gender Differences in Face-to-Face Deceptive Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 7995, CESifo.
    10. Brocas, Isabelle & Carrillo, Juan D., 2019. "A neuroeconomic theory of (dis) honesty," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 4-12.
    11. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant & Silvia Sonderegger, 2020. "It's Not a Lie If You Believe the Norm Does Not Apply: Conditional Norm-Following with Strategic Beliefs," CESifo Working Paper Series 8059, CESifo.
    12. Ann‐Kathrin Crede & Frauke von Bieberstein, 2020. "Reputation and lying aversion in the die roll paradigm: Reducing ambiguity fosters honest behavior," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 651-657, June.
    13. Casal, Sandro & Filippin, Antonio, 2020. "The Effect of Observing Multiple Private Information Outcomes on the Inclination to Cheat," IZA Discussion Papers 13689, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Ek, Claes, 2015. "Some Causes are More Equal than Others? Behavioral Spillovers in Charitable Giving," Working Papers 2015:29, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    15. Heinicke, Franziska & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Weitzel, Utz, 2019. "The effect of pledges on the distribution of lying behavior: An online experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 136-151.
    16. Christian Schitter & Jürgen Fleiß & Stefan Palan, 2017. "To claim or not to claim: Anonymity, reciprocal externalities and honesty," Working Paper Series, Social and Economic Sciences 2017-01, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Karl-Franzens-University Graz.
    17. Jantsje M. Mol & Eline C. M. Heijden & Jan J. M. Potters, 2020. "(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 961-978, December.
    18. Dato, Simon & Feess, Eberhard & Nieken, Petra, 2019. "Lying and reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 193-218.
    19. Khalmetski, Kiryl, 2019. "Evasion of guilt in expert advice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 296-310.
    20. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant, 2018. "It's Not A Lie If You Believe It. Lying and Belief Distortion Under Norm-Uncertainty," PPE Working Papers 0012, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    lying; honesty; morals; multidimensional; lab experiment; lab-in-the-field experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • H26 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Tax Evasion and Avoidance

    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:pra:mprapa:96640. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.