05 maio 2022


Pesquisa sobre a desonestidade, publicada pela American Psychological Association, no Psychological Bulletin deste ano. 

Although dishonesty is often a social phenomenon, it is primarily studied in individual settings. However, people frequently collaborate and engage in mutual dishonest acts. We report the first meta-analysis on collaborative dishonesty, analyzing 87,771 decisions (21 behavioral tasks; k = 123; nparticipants = 10,923). We provide an overview of all tasks used to measure collaborative dishonesty, and inform theory by conducting moderation analyses. Results reveal that collaborative dishonesty is higher (a) when financial incentives are high, (b) in lab than field studies, (c) when third parties experience no negative consequences, (d) in the absence of experimental deception, and (e) when groups consist of more males and (f) younger individuals. Further, in repeated interactions, group members’ behavior is correlated—participants lie more when their partners lie—and lying increases as the task progresses. These findings are in line with the justified ethicality theoretical perspective, suggesting prosocial concerns increase collaborative dishonesty, whereas honest-image concerns attenuate it. We discuss how findings inform theory, setting an agenda for future research on the collaborative roots of dishonesty

Os autores citam explicitamente um estudo brasileiro: 

Groups of three observe the same die-roll on a computer screen, and each group member is asked to report the outcome. Before making their reports, the group can chat for several minutes (via a computer chat). If all group members report the same outcome, they get paid based on the reported outcome. If group members report different outcomes, they get nothing.

A controvérsia é se o grupo influencia ou não:

The honest-image concern perspective suggests no effect for payoff alignment, because people’s concerns about viewing themselves, and others viewing them, as honest individuals, should not vary according to whether incentives are aligned or not. Initial results are mixed, finding that payoff alignment increases (Weisel & Shalvi, 2015), does not change (Beck et al., 2020), and decreases (Bonfim & Silva, 2018) collaborative dishonesty, rendering it especially worthy for meta-analytical examination

Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário