Personal characteristics and lying: An experimental investigation

Effect of religious priming in prosocial and destructive behaviour

“…Participants with higher religiosity are found to be more likely to destroy in a joy‐of‐destruction game and more likely to expect destructive behaviour from their anonymous partners. Childs () finds that the more religious University of Regina students are, the more likely they are to lie for financial gain and surmises it may be that subjects for whom religion was important feel separate from other students at this largely secular university. Montreal is also a largely secular city; only 16% of our subjects identified themselves as being religious.…”

Gender differences in cheating: Loss vs. gain framing

“…Our study is the first to test for gender differences in cheating using the die-paradigm and considering separately the Gain and Loss domains. Childs (2012, 2013), Cappelen et al (2013 and Grolleau et al (2016), among others, investigate gender differences in cheating using other tasks. In the die-paradigm, the experimental evidence when reports are associated with gains is mixed; e.g., Clot et al (2014) find that females cheat more than males, while Conrads et al (2017) find the opposite, and Muehlheusser et al (2015) do not observe gender differences (see Abeler et al (2016) for a recent meta-study on the die-paradigm).…”

Telling the other what one knows? Strategic lying in a modified acquiring-a-company experiment with two-sided private information

“…Analyzing gender differences relies on tests of statistical differences for non-independent observations (Moffat, 2015). 9 Our analysis, using the same test as in Table 2, reveals no gender difference in strategic misreporting in the buyer role for which strategic misreporting is not as dominant (see Table 1).…”

“…. Strategic misreporting instead is maximal for lowest 9 More specifically, gender effects in frequencies are tested via a regression where dependent variable is the frequency of truth-telling (or misreporting) of either males or females in the same matching group (periods pooled). Such aggregated frequencies are regressed on a single gender dummy to check whether they differ significantly from male to female participants.…”

“…Whether and how gender affects the propensity to lie is still a controversial topic in the literature. 5 While Dreber and Johannesson (2008) find women to lie less than men, Childs (2012Childs ( , 2013 and Gylfason, Arnardottir and Kristinsson (2013) observe no gender effect in lying even when varying the amount at stake. On the other hand, Erat and Gneezy (2012) highlight the interplay between lying behavior and other-regarding concerns and find that lying behavior is sensitive to how it affects others: women are less likely lie when this harms others and lie more likely when this benefits others.…”