The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2023
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-1444049/v3
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Morality in Minimally Deceptive Environments

Abstract: Psychologists, economists, and philosophers have long argued that in environments where deception is normative, moral behavior is harmed. In this article, we show that individuals making decisions within minimally deceptive environments do not behave more dishonestly than in nondeceptive environments. We demonstrate the latter using an example of experimental deception within established institutions, such as laboratories and institutional review boards. We experimentally manipulated whether participants recei… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 72 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The main argument against authorized deception was that it might reduce study validity, which is also mentioned by several researchers (Dowrick et al, 2007;Finney, 1987;Gogtay et al, 2020;Holmes & Bennett, 1974;Martin & Katz, 2010). However, there is also some evidence that suggests that authorized deception leads to more appreciation by participants (Allen, 1983;Dowrick et al, 2007;Finney, 1987;Gogtay et al, 2020;Holmes & Bennett, 1974;Klein & Smith, 2004;Martin & Katz, 2010;Wiener & Erker, 1986) and that signaling the potential use of deception might not influence validity for all deceptive studies (Gerlach et al, 2019;Krawczyk, 2015;Mitkidis et al, 2022). Regarding conditions, some guidelines required ethics approval for a waiver of authorized deception.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main argument against authorized deception was that it might reduce study validity, which is also mentioned by several researchers (Dowrick et al, 2007;Finney, 1987;Gogtay et al, 2020;Holmes & Bennett, 1974;Martin & Katz, 2010). However, there is also some evidence that suggests that authorized deception leads to more appreciation by participants (Allen, 1983;Dowrick et al, 2007;Finney, 1987;Gogtay et al, 2020;Holmes & Bennett, 1974;Klein & Smith, 2004;Martin & Katz, 2010;Wiener & Erker, 1986) and that signaling the potential use of deception might not influence validity for all deceptive studies (Gerlach et al, 2019;Krawczyk, 2015;Mitkidis et al, 2022). Regarding conditions, some guidelines required ethics approval for a waiver of authorized deception.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%