Honesty Among Lawyers: Moral Character, Game Framing, and Honest Disclosures in Negotiations

Abstract

Lawyers have broad discretion in deciding how honestly to behave when negotiating. We propose that lawyers’ choices about whether to disclose information to correct misimpressions by opposing counsel are guided by their moral character and their cognitive framing of negotiation. To investigate this possibility, we surveyed 215 lawyers from across the United States, examining the degree to which honest disclosure is associated with lawyers’ moral character and their tendency to frame negotiation in game‐like terms—a construal of negotiation that we label game framing. We hypothesize that the more that lawyers view negotiation through a game frame—that is, the more they view negotiation as an adversarial context with arbitrary and artificial rules—the less honest they will be in situations in which honest disclosure is not mandated by professional rules of conduct. We further hypothesize that lawyers with higher levels of moral character will apply a game frame to negotiation to a lesser degree than will lawyers with lower levels of moral character, and that honesty when negotiating will be higher when lawyers have higher versus lower levels of moral character. Our study results support these hypotheses. This work suggests that focusing on game‐like aspects of negotiation can induce a less moral and ethical mindset. To the extent that teaching law students to “think like a lawyer” encourages them to adopt a game frame of negotiation, we can expect such training to reduce the likelihood of honest disclosure.

A concept analysis of misconduct: Application to nursing education

“…The authors concluded that the lawyers violate the rules and practice dishonest behaviors; the antecedent indicated a less ethical and moral mindset, ending with legal consequences. 28…”

“…The authors described attributes of misconduct as bad and unacceptable behaviors by police officers when they use their power (antecedent) to make misguided and illegal decisions, resulting in consequences such as a loss of confidence within the community. 27 On the other side of the world, in the United States of America, Cohen et al 28 investigated lawyers’ honesty in disclosing information, which moral norms should guide. The authors concluded that the lawyers violate the rules and practice dishonest behaviors; the antecedent indicated a less ethical and moral mindset, ending with legal consequences.…”

“…The authors concluded that the lawyers violate the rules and practice dishonest behaviors; the antecedent indicated a less ethical and moral mindset, ending with legal consequences. 28 In the United States of America, Vitro et al 29 examined police attitudes against the black race. The authors discussed brutality and racial bias as the attributes of misconduct, which were dominant among police officers who demonstrate racism, resulting in consequences of domestic violence and loss of trust.…”

“…Loss of confidence, violence, loss of trust, and legal consequences were the expected consequences of misconduct. 11,[27][28][29] Religion. Like the field of law, misconduct in religion is mainly practiced by people with authority and power.…”

الاسهام النسبی للشخصیة الأخلاقیة وأنماط الدافعیة وما وراء السلوک فی السلوک الاجتماعی الإیجابی لدی طلاب الجامعة

“…‫يخد(ر‬ ‫امدل‬ ‫لبحدلةا(ن‬ ‫سدن‬ ‫فيدف‬ ‫لب‬ (Hardy, et al, 2015;Wentzel, 2018Wentzel, ,1748Bayar et al, 2020;Peetz & Milyavskaya, 2021 (Hannah et al,2011;Winterich, et al,2013;Cohen et al,2014;Fleeson et al, 2014;;Ding, et al,2018;Patrick, et al,2018;Cohen et al,2021;Zhou et al,2021;Lin & Shek, 2022 ) . ‫د(‬ ‫لبخالقد‬ ‫خ‬ ‫د‬ ‫بقد‬ ‫دلحر‬ ‫لبسد‬ ‫دير ( ) ‫لبسلح(‬ ‫لاجوملج(‬ ‫ل‬ ‫لب‬ ‫لأ‬ ‫رد‬ ‫بل‬ ‫لاجوملج(‬ ‫لبوكلب (ف‬ (Niesta et al,2010;Osswald et al, 2011,392) .…”