Justified ethicality: Observing desired counterfactuals modifies ethical perceptions and behavior

Employing a die-under-cup paradigm, we study the extent to which people lie when it is transparently clear they cannot be caught. We asked participants to report the outcome of a private die roll and gain money according to their reports. Results suggest that the degree of lying depends on the exten...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Organizational behavior and human decision processes Jg. 115; H. 2; S. 181 - 190
Hauptverfasser:	Shalvi, Shaul, Dana, Jason, Handgraaf, Michel J.J., De Dreu, Carsten K.W.
Format:	Journal Article
Sprache:	Englisch
Veröffentlicht:	Kidlington Elsevier Inc 01.07.2011 Elsevier Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc
Schriftenreihe:	Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Schlagworte:	Applied psychology Behavioral economics Behavioral ethics Behavioural economics Betrug Biological and medical sciences Counterfactual thinking Counterfactuals Deceit Deception Die-under-cup paradigm Ethical decision making Ethics Ethik Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Honesty Legitimacy Lies Lies Deception Ethical decision making Behavioral economics Behavioral ethics Morality Ethics Counterfactual thinking Norm Theory Mutability Lying Miscellaneous Money Morality Mutability Norm Theory Organizational behavior Organizational behaviour Perception Perceptions Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Social psychology Studies Test Value Verhalten Ethics Morality Deception Behavioral ethics Mutability Behavioral economics Counterfactual thinking Ethical decision making Norm Theory Lies Human Decision making Theory Moral attitude Cognition Moral science Standards Lying Perception
ISSN:	0749-5978, 1095-9920
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:	Employing a die-under-cup paradigm, we study the extent to which people lie when it is transparently clear they cannot be caught. We asked participants to report the outcome of a private die roll and gain money according to their reports. Results suggest that the degree of lying depends on the extent to which self-justifications are available. Specifically, when people are allowed to roll the die three times to ensure its legitimacy, but only the first roll is supposed to “count,” we find evidence that the highest outcome of the three rolls is reported. Eliminating the ability to observe more than one roll reduces lying. Additional results suggest that observing desired counterfactuals, in the form of additional rolls not meant to determine pay, attenuates the degree to which people perceive lies as unethical. People seem to derive value from self-justifications allowing them to lie for money while feeling honest.
Bibliographie:	SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-2
ISSN:	0749-5978 1095-9920
DOI:	10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.02.001