Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T09:22:04.386Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dishonesty under scrutiny

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Jeroen van de Ven  and
Marie Claire Villeval
Jeroen van de Ven*
Affiliation:
ACLE (University of Amsterdam) and Tinbergen Institute, Valckeniersstraat 65-67, 1018 XE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Marie Claire Villeval*
Affiliation:
Université de Lyon, 69007 Lyon, France CNRS, GATE Lyon St Etienne, 93, Chemin des Mouilles, 69130 Ecully, France IZA, Bonn, Germany
*
e-mail: [email protected]
e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We investigate how different forms of scrutiny affect dishonesty, using Gneezy’s [Am Econ Rev 95:384–394 (2005)] deception game. We add a third player whose interests are aligned with those of the sender. We find that lying behavior is not sensitive to revealing the sender’s identity to the observer. The option for observers to communicate with the sender, and the option to reveal the sender’s lies to the receiver also do not affect lying behavior. Even more striking, senders whose identity is revealed to their observer do not lie less when their interests are misaligned with those of the observer.

Keywords

DeceptionLiesDishonestySocial imageExperiment

JEL classification

C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior D83: Search • Learning • Information and Knowledge • Communication • Belief • Unawareness
Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2015 , pp. 86 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © Economic Science Association 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40881-015-0002-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

References

Andreoni, J., Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Social image and the 50–50 norm: a theoretical and experimental analysis of audience effects. Econometrica, 77(5), 1607–1636. 10.3982/ECTA7384Google Scholar
Ariely, D. (2012). The (honest) truth about dishonesty, New-York: Harper Collins Publishers.Google Scholar
Ariely, D., Bracha, A., Meier, S. (2009). Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. American Economic Review, 99(1), 544–555. 10.1257/aer.99.1.544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Battigalli, P., Dufwenberg, M. (2007). Guilt in games. American Economic Review, 97, 170–176. 10.1257/aer.97.2.170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belot, M., Bhaskar, V., van de Ven, J. (2009). Promises and cooperation: evidence from a TV game show. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73(3), 396–405. 10.1016/j.jebo.2010.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belot, M., & Schroder, M. (2013). Does monitoring work? A field experiment with multiple forms of counterproductive behaviour. Working Paper No. 6/2013, University of Magdeburg.Google Scholar
Benabou, R., Tirole, J. (2006). Incentives and prosocial behavior. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1652–1678. 10.1257/aer.96.5.1652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., Dufwenberg, M. (2006). Promises and partnership. Econometrica, 74(6), 1579–1601. 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00719.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., Gneezy, U. (2012). Strong evidence for gender differences in risk-taking. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 83, 50–58. 10.1016/j.jebo.2011.06.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., Masclet, D., Villeval, M. C. (2014). The dark side of competition for status. Management Science, 60(1), 38–55. 10.1287/mnsc.2013.1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charness, G., Rigotti, L., Rustichini, A. (2007). Individual behavior and group membership. American Economic Review, 97(4), 1340–1352. 10.1257/aer.97.4.1340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christie, R., Geis, F. (1970). Studies in machiavellianism, New-York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellingsen, T., Johanneson, M., Lilja, J. (2009). Trust and truth. Economic Journal, 119(534), 252–276. 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02212.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M. (2008). Anticipated verbal feedback induces altruistic behavior. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 29(2), 100–105. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M., Tjøtta, S., Torsvik, G. (2010). Testing guilt aversion. Games and Economic Behavior, 68, 95–107. 10.1016/j.geb.2009.04.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erat, S., Gneezy, U. (2012). White lies. Management Science, 58(4), 723–733. 10.1287/mnsc.1110.1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. 10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischbacher, U., Föllmi-Heusi, F. (2013). Lies in disguise. an experimental study on cheating. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3), 525–547. 10.1111/jeea.12014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, R., Tanner, C., Wagner, A. (2013). Preferences for truthfulness: heterogeneity among and within individuals. American Economic Review, 103(1), 532–548. 10.1257/aer.103.1.532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gino, F., Ayal, S., Ariely, D. (2009). Contagion and differentiation in unethical behavior: the effect of one bad apple on the barrel. Psychological Science, 20(3), 393–398. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02306.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gino, F., Ayal, S., Ariely, D. (2013). Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 93, 285–292. 10.1016/j.jebo.2013.04.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gneezy, U. (2005). Deception: the role of consequences. American Economic Review, 95(1), 384–394. 10.1257/0002828053828662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gneezy, U., Potters, J. (1997). An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 631–645. 10.1162/003355397555217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, A., Smeets, P., & Zhurakhovska, L. (2014). Lying, Guilt, and Shame. Working Paper, University of California, San Diego.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greiner, B. (2004). An online recruitment system for economic experiments. In: Kremer, K., Macho, V. (Eds). Forschung und wissenschaftliches Rechnen, GWDG Bericht 63 (pp. 79–93). Gottingen: Ges. fr Wiss. Datenverarbeitung.Google Scholar
Hao, L., & Houser, D. (2011). Honest lies. Discussion Paper, ICES, George Mason University.Google Scholar
Lundquist, T., Ellingsen, T., Gribbe, E., Johannesson, M. (2009). The aversion to lying. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 70, 81–92. 10.1016/j.jebo.2009.02.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazar, N., Amir, O., Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: a theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633–644. 10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, X., & Xiao, E. (2014). It’s not just the thought that counts: an experimental study on hidden cost of giving. SSRN, Mimeo. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2523753. Accessed 21 Feb 2015.Google Scholar
Pruckner, G. J., Sausgruber, R. (2013). Honesty on the streets: a field study on newspaper purchasing. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3), 661–679. 10.1111/jeea.12016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuben, E., Stephenson, M. (2013). Nobody likes a rat: on the willingness to report lies and the consequences thereof. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 93, 384–391. 10.1016/j.jebo.2013.03.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutter, M. (2009). Deception through telling the truth?! Experimental evidence from individuals and teams. The Economic Journal, 119, 47–60. 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02205.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutter, M., Strassmair, C. (2009). Communication, cooperation and collusion in team tournaments—an experimental study. Games and Economic Behavior, 66(1), 506–525. 10.1016/j.geb.2008.02.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanberg, C. (2008). Why do people keep their promises? An experimental test of two explanations. Econometrica, 76(6), 1467–1480. 10.3982/ECTA7673Google Scholar
Volz, K., Vogeley, K., Tittgemeyer, M., von Cramon, Y., & Sutter, M. (2015). The neural basis of deception in strategic interaction. Frontiers in Behavioral Neurosciences, 9, 27. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00027Google Scholar
Wang, J. T., Spezio, M., Camerer, C. F. (2010). Pinocchio’s pupil: using eyetracking and pupil dilation to understand truth telling and deception in sender-receiver games. American Economic Review, 100(3), 984–1007. 10.1257/aer.100.3.984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltermuth, S. S. (2011). Cheating more when the spoils are split. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 157–168. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, E. (2013). Profit-seeking punishment corrupts norm obedience. Games and Economic Behavior, 77, 321–344. 10.1016/j.geb.2012.10.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, E., Houser, D. (2011). Punish in public. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 1006–1017. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

van de Ven and Villeval supplementary material

van de Ven and Villeval supplementary material
Download van de Ven and Villeval supplementary material(File)
File 90.6 KB