Fairness and cheating

Houser, Daniel; Vetter, Stefan; Winter, Joachim

doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2012.08.001

Cited by 264 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

111

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is confirmed by a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test on average reported profit levels (p = 0.047). Hence, we support the gender differences predominately found in the literature (e.g., Dreber and Johannesson, 2008;Houser et al, 2012;Conrads et al, 2013).…”

Section: The Impact Of Gender and Svo On Honestysupporting

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation

Grosch

Rau

2017

Journal of Economic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may University of Mannheim, University of Göttingen March 2017Abstract This paper experimentally analyzes the determinants of the honesty norm in a lying game. The findings confirm common gender differences, i.e., men cheat significantly more than women. We detect a novel correlation between subjects' magnitude of concern they have for others (social value orientation) and their moral valuation of the norm honesty. The data suggest that individualistic subjects are less honest than prosocial ones. Interestingly, this difference can explain the gender differences we observe. First, we find that the distribution of social value orientation differs between gender, i.e., significantly more male subjects are characterized as individualistic subjects. Second, once we control for social value orientation the gender differential disappears. JEL Classification numbers: C91, H26, J16.

show abstract

Section: The Impact Of Gender and Svo On Honestysupporting

confidence: 78%

“…1 This is shown in the lab (e.g., Erat and Gneezy, 2012;Houser et al, 2012;Conrads et al, 2014;Kocher et al, 2016) 2 and in the field (Azar et al, 2013;Bucciol et al, 2013). Although, the literature predominately finds that men cheat significantly more, some studies find no gender differences (e.g., Childs, 2012;Djawadi and Fahr, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation

Grosch

Rau

2017

Journal of Economic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference is marginally significant (MWU-test, p = 0.077, two-sided). 28 Given that many women overestimate their relative performance but guess worse ranks in Info, one might wonder whether women's guessed ranks become more accurate in Info due to shame-aversion. This would presume that rather those women who show a tendency to overestimate themselves downgrade their beliefs due to shame-aversion (e.g.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do women have more shame than men? An experiment on self-assessment and the shame of overestimating oneself

Ludwig

Fellner-Röhling

Thoma

2017

European Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze how subjects' self-assessment depends on whether its accuracy is observable to others. We find that women downgrade their selfassessment given observability while men do not. Women avoid the shame they may have if others observe that they overestimated themselves. Men, however, do not seem to be similarly shame-averse. This gender difference may be due to different societal expectations: While we find that men are expected to be overconfident, women are not. Shame-aversion may explain recent findings that women shy away from competition, demanding jobs and wage negotiations, as entering these situations is a statement to be confident of one's ability.

show abstract

“…Because participants were fully shielded from view, no one (including the experimenters) could detect whether individual subjects misreported the outcomes of their die rolls. However, it is possible to detect cheating at the group level by comparing the mean percentage of successful die rolls reported by the subjects with the 50% benchmark if everyone reported honestly (35). The other experimental measures acquired in each session included a dictator game to measure selfish behavior, an investment task to measure preferences for risky and ambiguous outcomes, and a delay discounting task to measure impulsivity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing honesty in humans with noninvasive brain stimulation

Maréchal

Cohn

Ugazio

et al. 2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Honesty plays a key role in social and economic interactions and is crucial for societal functioning. However, breaches of honesty are pervasive and cause significant societal and economic problems that can affect entire nations. Despite its importance, remarkably little is known about the neurobiological mechanisms supporting honest behavior. We demonstrate that honesty can be increased in humans with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Participants (n = 145) completed a die-rolling task where they could misreport their outcomes to increase their earnings, thereby pitting honest behavior against personal financial gain. Cheating was substantial in a control condition but decreased dramatically when neural excitability was enhanced with tDCS. This increase in honesty could not be explained by changes in material self-interest or moral beliefs and was dissociated from participants' impulsivity, willingness to take risks, and mood. A follow-up experiment (n = 156) showed that tDCS only reduced cheating when dishonest behavior benefited the participants themselves rather than another person, suggesting that the stimulated neural process specifically resolves conflicts between honesty and material self-interest. Our results demonstrate that honesty can be strengthened by noninvasive interventions and concur with theories proposing that the human brain has evolved mechanisms dedicated to control complex social behaviors.honesty | cheating | social decision making | brain stimulation | dorsolateral prefrontal cortex

show abstract

Fairness and cheating

Cited by 264 publications

References 22 publications

Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation

Gender differences in honesty: The role of social value orientation

Do women have more shame than men? An experiment on self-assessment and the shame of overestimating oneself

Increasing honesty in humans with noninvasive brain stimulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About