Search

Parenting by lying is a practice in which parents lie to their children to influence their emotions or behavior. Recently, researchers have tried to document the nature of this phenomenon and to understand its causes and consequences. The present research provides an overview of the research in the emerging field, describes some key theoretical and methodological challenges in studying this topic, and proposes a theoretical framework for understanding parenting by lying and for guiding future research to advance our knowledge about this understudied parenting practice.

This article explores the influence of sadness in ethical decision-making and behavior. In three laboratory studies, we found that an incidental state of sadness reduced individuals' propensity to engage in morally questionable behavior, including both unethical and selfish acts (Studies 1 to 3). We found this effect to be mediated by the role of sadness in prompting people to pay more attention to the negative consequences of morally questionable acts and perceive those consequences as more problematic (Studies 2 and 3). This effect was consistent using different decision-making contexts and held when rewards to be gained from such behavior were relatively high. Several implications of these findings for business ethics and organizations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dishonesty, including lying, cheating, deception, and deviating from societal norms, has far-reaching implications across various aspects of modern society. From minor consequences like social discontent to severe outcomes such as economic damage through tax evasion, dishonest behavior aects us in multiple ways. This study investigates whether gender and psychological traits contribute to dishonest behavior, and whether unethical conduct is stable across diverse tasks. We examined 63 participants using a “Dierence Spotting Task” (DST) and two motor tasks (1. coordinative throwing; 2. isometric strength). Dishonesty was measured by comparing self-reported performance with actual performance, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of both occurrence and extent of dishonesty. Our findings indicate that gender does not significantly influence the occurrence or extent of dishonest behavior. Moreover, we discovered that “Social Desirability” positively influences the extent of dishonesty, while “Task Orientation” increases the likelihood of engaging in dishonest acts. The study also reveals that the level of dishonesty remains relatively stable across all three tasks at an intrapersonal level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Among basic personality traits, Honesty‐Humility yields the most consistent, negative link with dishonest behavior. The theoretical conceptualization of Honesty‐Humility, however, suggests a potential boundary condition of this relation, namely, when lying is prosocial. We therefore tested the hypothesis that the association between Honesty‐Humility and dishonesty weakens once lying benefits someone else, particularly so if this other is needy. Methods: In two online studies (Study 1: N = 775 in Germany; Study 2: N = 737 in the UK, preregistered), we measured self‐reported Honesty‐Humility and dishonest behavior in incentivized cheating paradigms in which the beneficiary of participants' dishonesty was either the participants themselves, a "non‐needy" other (e.g., another participant), or a "needy" other (e.g., a charity). Results: We found support for the robustness of the negative association between Honesty‐Humility and dishonesty, even if lying was prosocial. Conclusion: Individuals high in Honesty‐Humility largely prioritize honesty, even if there is a strong moral imperative to lie; those low in Honesty‐Humility, by contrast, tend to lie habitually and thus even if they themselves do not directly profit monetarily. This suggests that (un)truthfulness may be an absolute rather than a relative aspect of Honesty‐Humility, although further systematic tests of this proposition are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Investigating the effects of monetary incentives on dishonest behavior provides valuable insights into human integrity and ethical decision-making processes. This study is conducted through the lens of self-concept maintenance theory. Aim: The aim of this study is to examine the influence of different types of rewards (score-based vs. monetary) and their magnitude on dishonest behavior within a gender judgment task. Method: Using a quantitative experimental design, this study involved 116 participants who were randomly assigned to conditions that differed in reward type (score or money) and magnitude (10 yuan vs. 50 yuan). Dishonest behavior was assessed using a gender judgment task with mechanisms to simulate conditions conducive to planned cheating. Results: Results revealed significant differences in dishonesty rates between score and money conditions, with a higher proportion of dishonest participants observed in the score condition compared to the money condition. The timing of initial cheating was earlier in the score condition compared to the money condition. No significant differences were found in the proportion of dishonest participants, the cheating rate, or the timing of initial cheating across reward levels within either condition. The rate of cheating increased over time, suggesting a temporal dynamic in unethical decision making. Conclusion: The study demonstrates that the nature of rewards significantly influences the likelihood of dishonest behavior, with intangible score-based rewards facilitating rationalizations for dishonesty more readily than tangible financial incentives. These findings enrich the understanding of moral psychology by highlighting the complex interplay between reward types, ethical rationalization, and the dynamics of dishonest behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We develop a general norm-dependent utility function with disutility for actions that are inferior or superior to a norm. We test its validity by assessing the moderating role of norm sensitivity in explaining responses to peer influences in a budget reporting experiment. Managers become less honest after seeing a less honest peer (the rotten apple effect) and more honest after seeing a more honest peer (the sterling example effect). We measure the sensitivity to social norms by the Maintaining Norms Schema score generated from the responses to the Defining Issue Test-2 moral reasoning questionnaire. We find that (1) the sterling example effect is significantly increased in an individual's sensitivity to social norms and (2) the rotten apple effect does not vary significantly with an individual's sensitivity to social norms. Our evidence supports inclusion of a disutility component for actions that are inferior to the norm in representations of personal preferences. JEL Classifications: C72, D03; J44; M41; M55. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cheating in higher education is a significant problem. The study aims to determine nursing students' attitudes and opinions toward cheating in exams. The type of research is descriptive. The research data were collected in the classroom environment of 716 students in day and evening education programs. The research data were collected using socio-demographic characteristics form, and the Copying Attitude Scale. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and variance analysis were used for data analyses. The most common method of cheating was receiving answers by talking to the friend sitting next to the student. The rate of cheating was high in both the day and evening education students. The students reported that most of the cheating occurred in final exams and high-credit major courses. Learning type (day/evening education programs) is not effective in cheating. High-credit major courses have increased the fear of failing the course. The most important reason for cheating in exams was the fear of failing a course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People feel committed to other individuals, groups, organizations, or moral norms in many contexts of everyday life. Such social commitment can lead to positive outcomes, such as increased job satisfaction or relationship longevity; yet, there can also be detrimental effects to feeling committed. Recent high-profile cases of fraud or corruption in companies like Enron or Volkswagen are likely influenced by strong commitment to the organization or coworkers. Although social commitment might increase dishonest behavior, there is little systematic knowledge about when and how this may occur. In the present project, we reviewed 20,988 articles, focusing on studies that experimentally manipulated social commitment and measured dishonest behavior. We retained 445 effect sizes from 121 articles featuring a total of 91,683 participants across 33 countries. We found no evidence that social commitment increases or reduces dishonest behavior in general. Nonetheless, we did find evidence that the effect strongly depends on the target of the commitment. Feeling committed to other individuals or groups reduces honest behavior (g = −0.17 [−0.24, −0.11]), whereas feeling committed to honesty norms through honesty oaths or pledges increases honest behavior (g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36]). The analysis identified several moderating variables and detected some degree of publication bias across effects. Our findings highlight the diverging effects of different forms of social commitment on dishonest behavior and suggest a combination of the different forms of commitment could be a possible means to combat corruption and dishonest behavior in the organizational context. Public Significance Statement: This meta-analysis reveals that social commitment can impact dishonest behavior in various ways. Feeling committed or interacting with other individuals showed an increase in dishonesty, whereas committing to an honesty norm (by signing an honesty oath, for example) showed an increase in honesty. These effects were small and subject to different situational moderations. We propose that a combination of both types of commitment, commitment to loyalty and commitment to honesty norms, might be important in achieving good teamwork while at the same time reducing dishonest behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Lying is a common social behavior; however, there is limited research on lying about health and if this differs into later life. This study sought to explore age differences in the frequency of and motivations behind telling health-related lies and if lying differs within romantic and parent/child relationships. Methods Younger (N = 158) and older adults (N = 149) reported how often they told general health-related lies, how often they lied about health to their romantic partner and parent or adult child, and why they told health lies. Results Compared with older adults, younger adults lied more frequently to conceal sickness and pain as well as to feign sickness. Younger adults also told more health lies to their parent than their romantic partner, but older adults lied to their adult child and partner at similar rates. Younger adults reported lying more about their health because they felt ashamed or embarrassed and they worried about what others would think of them compared with older adults. Discussion These results suggest that health-related honesty may increase in later life and that younger and older adults differ in why they tell health lies. Implications for psychological theory on lying about one's health and health interventions are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic cheating is a pervasive problem in many universities globally. The present double-blind randomized controlled field experiment tested whether reminding university students about academic dishonesty sanction policies would reduce their cheating in an actual exam. Students were assigned to either a Sanction Reminder or a No Reminder condition. Results showed a significant condition effect: Fewer students in the Sanction Reminder condition cheated than in the No Reminder condition; among those who cheated, males and females did not differ in their extent of cheating in the No Reminder condition but in the Reminder condition, male students cheated to a lesser extent than females. These findings suggest that sanction reminder, a widely used academic integrity practice, may indeed have its utility to promote academic honesty in exams. Further, they suggest that to reduce cheating on exams, one does not need to use methods that are overtly explicit and elaborate. A brief, subtle, and simple reminder would suffice. Our research also illustrates the importance of conducting well-controlled field behavioral research to evaluate the effectiveness of commonly implemented educational practices to ascertain that they indeed serve their designed pedagogical purposes to promote optimal learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the role of cognitive control in moral decision-making, focusing on conflicts between financial temptations and the integrity of honesty. We employed a perceptual task by asking participants to identify which side of the diagonal contained more red dots within a square to provoke both honest and dishonest behaviors, tracking their reaction times (RTs). Participants encountered situations with no conflict, ambiguous conflict, and clear conflict. Their behaviors in the clear conflict condition categorized them as either “honest” or “dishonest.” Our findings suggested that, in ambiguous conflict situations, honest individuals had significantly longer RTs and fewer self-interest responses than their dishonest counterparts, suggesting a greater need for cognitive control to resolve conflicts and a lesser tendency toward self-interest. Moreover, a negative correlation was found between participants’ number of self-interest responses and RTs in ambiguous conflict situations (r = −0.27 in study 1 and r = −0.66 in study 2), and a positive correlation with cheating numbers in clear conflict situations (r = 0.36 in study 1 and r = 0.82 in study 2). This suggests less cognitive control was required for self-interest and cheating responses, bolstering the “Will” hypothesis. We also found that a person’s self-interest tendency could predict their dishonest behavior. These insights extend our understanding of the role of cognitive control plays in honesty and dishonesty, with potential applications in education, policy-making, and business ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the main challenges developing nations face is curbing bribery. While there are many efforts to curb bribery, most focused at macro level, such as law, while little has been examined at the micro level, e.g., individual behavior and intention. Those who did investigate at the micro level tend to focus on the recipients rather than the ones giving the bribe. We explored eight factors that influence Malaysian young adults' bribe giving intention based on the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA). A total of 345 respondents (Mage = 20.68, SD = 2.01, 189 are females) completed questionnaires about all RAA variables. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) was carried out using smartPLS3.0 to analyze the result. The result revealed that out of the eight variables, four variables—Instrumental attitudes, Experiential Attitudes, Parents' descriptive norms and Capacity—explain 74% of the variance in bribe giving intention. An important take-away is that young adult's perception of whether their parents gave or did not give bribes in a given situation is important in influencing their bribe giving intention. Bribe giving prevention messages must be targeted explicitly toward parents, where they play a crucial role in curbing this dishonesty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the present study was to examine how a person with amnestic mild cognitive impairment perceives the phenomenon of deception. Amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) usually represents the prodromal phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), with patients showing memory impairment but with normal activities of daily living. It was expected that aMCI patients would face difficulties in the attribution and interpretation of deceptive behavior due to deficits regarding their diagnosis. The main sample of the study consisted of 76 older adults who were patients of a daycare center diagnosed with aMCI. A sample of 55 highly educated young adults was also examined in the same experiment to qualitatively compare their performance with that of aMCI patients. Participants were assigned a scenario where a hypothetical partner (either a friend or a stranger) was engaged in a task in which the partner could lie to boost their earnings at the expense of the participant. The results showed that aMCI patients, even if they understood that something was going wrong, did not invest in interpretations of potential deception and tended to avoid searching for confirmative information related to the hypothetical lie of their partner compared to highly educated young adults. It seems that aMCI patients become somehow "innocent", and this is discussed in terms of cognitive impairment and/or socioemotional selectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated the impact of one person's attractiveness on the moral behavior exhibited by others. In our experiment, subjects were invited to perform an inverse version of the die-under-the-cup (DUTC) task that incentivized underreporting of the actual die outcome. Participants provided self-reports after being presented with a facial photograph of a female. Men tended to behave more honestly when they perceived an image of a beautiful female face. Strikingly, women exhibited the opposite pattern of behavior, and experienced a beauty penalty toward attractive women. Individuals tended to act more dishonestly when presented with a highly attractive facial image than when presented with a less attractive image. Women's greater dishonesty in the presence of an attractive female face can thus be explained by the negative emotional priming of female jealousy and envy, which is related to social comparison theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our experiment explores the impact of asymmetric incentives on collaboration within a context where participants can coordinate and potentially engage in deceptive practices to secure financial gains. We contrast two scenarios: one in which cooperation results in an equal distribution of gains, and another where the distribution is unequal. Our investigation focuses on the dynamics of collaborative behavior over time and digs into individual strategies employed by participants. We find that corruptive collaboration persists when its gains are unequally divided. Over time, participants acquire experience in collaborative tactics, often utilizing their reports to covert signals. Notably, participants coordinate around compromise distributions that yield smaller payments, suggesting that this context may actually reduce the perceived cost of dishonesty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dishonesty, including lying, cheating, deception, and deviating from societal norms, has far-reaching implications across various aspects of modern society. From minor consequences like social discontent to severe outcomes such as economic damage through tax evasion, dishonest behavior affects us in multiple ways. This study investigates whether gender and psychological traits contribute to dishonest behavior, and whether unethical conduct is stable across diverse tasks. We examined 63 participants using a “Difference Spotting Task” (DST) and two motor tasks (1. coordinative throwing; 2. isometric strength). Dishonesty was measured by comparing self-reported performance with actual performance, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of both occurrence and extent of dishonesty. Our findings indicate that gender does not significantly influence the occurrence or extent of dishonest behavior. Moreover, we discovered that “Social Desirability” positively influences the extent of dishonesty, while “Task Orientation” increases the likelihood of engaging in dishonest acts. The study also reveals that the level of dishonesty remains relatively stable across all three tasks at an intrapersonal level.

In this study, we investigate the motives behind additional rolling behavior in a die-rolling task and explore the strategic use of curiosity when participants are tempted to report dishonestly. We conducted a virtual die-rolling experiment with four conditions, manipulating the number of allowed rolls and the type of die used (numbers or symbols) to understand the factors driving participants to roll the die more than once. Our findings reveal that participants tend to roll more when observing lower first-roll outcomes, and this finding holds regardless of whether the die displays numbers or random symbols. Dishonest participants tend to stop rolling at the highest possible outcome, indicating a pattern of strategic curiosity. However, we find no variation in dishonesty across treatments, suggesting dishonest individuals self-select into rolling more and search for higher numbers to support their dishonest reports. Therefore, our study offers mixed support for the justified ethicality theory and sheds light on the motivations underlying additional rolling behavior, contributing to a better understanding of the factors that drive strategic information acquisition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted an experiment with 204 youth inmates to study how the intrinsic psychological cost of cheating that was shaped by peers changed inmates' cheating behavior. We find that innately dishonest inmates who naively revealed their higher willingness to cheat indeed cheated more in the actual game. When given the chance to observe an imperfect signal of whether a peer cheated, only innately dishonest inmates followed this signal and cheated more. This positive treatment effect increases with the saliency of the signal, and becomes more pronounced when the cheating signal is from an influential peer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated lying as a collective‐risk social dilemma. Misreporting resulted in increased individual earnings but when total claims reached a certain threshold, all group members were at risk of collective sanction, regardless of their individual behavior. Due to selfishness and miscoordination, most individuals earned less than the reservation payoff from honest reporting in the group. However, preferences for truth‐telling lowered the risk of collective sanction in this setting compared to a social dilemma game in which players could make direct claims without lying. The risk of sanctions decreased with risk aversion and a smaller group size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Tecnología, Ciencia & Educación is the property of Centro de Estudios Financieros SL and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper presents a lying game where participants can achieve the same outcome through either direct lying or playing the victim. Participants are assigned initial endowments, and some of them receive negative shocks to their endowments. They can choose to misreport their final endowments directly or adopt a playing-the-victim strategy by seeking additional compensation, even without experiencing the shock. The findings suggest that direct lying is infrequent, with the majority of participants engaging in playing the victim behavior. The study further investigates the effects of defaults and signing an honesty oath, as well as the underlying factors that influence playing the victim behavior. Contrary to initial expectations, the omission treatments, where lying is the default option, did not increase misrepresentation and, if anything, decreased it, while the honesty oath effectively reduced it as anticipated. Additionally, the degree of pro-sociality and one's attitude towards corruption were observed to have a significant association with playing the victim behavior. These findings provide valuable insights for the formulation of more effective policies to support victims, particularly in times of crises like the Covid-19 pandemic. • Subjects can play the victim or lie directly in an experimental setting. • The prevalence of playing the victim behavior exceeds that of direct lying significantly. • Omission treatments, where lying is the default, failed to increase misrepresentation. • An honesty oath significantly reduced victim-playing. • Pro-sociality is negatively correlated with playing the victim behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To examine whether and how therapy orientation is associated with psychotherapists' perceived reasons for, feelings about, and regrets around their own dishonesty in therapy. A sample of 255 psychodynamic (n= 81), cognitive-behavior (n= 92), integrative (n= 64), and humanistic (n= 18) therapists who reported having been "less than completely honest" to a client provided open-text responses regarding this occurrence. A bricoleur approach was used to identify themes among responses, and Fisher's exact test analyses were used to compare responses across theoretical orientations. The most frequent reason offered for instances of less than complete honesty was "treatment strategy" (i.e. it was deemed necessary for treatment). The most common feeling reported was discomfort, including anxiety. Most respondents reported that, in retrospect, they would not have handled the situation differently. Therapist orientation was not significantly associated to any pattern of responses to these questions. While therapist dishonesty is perceived as occurring primarily in the service of the client and tends to evoke similar reactions among therapists across theoretical orientations, most therapists report experiencing negative feelings after acting somewhat dishonestly. Training programs should encourage greater discussion about the potential benefits and consequences of therapeutic dishonesty, including instances of therapeutic tact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assessed the relation of creativity and unethical behaviour by manipulating the thinking style of participants (N = 450 adults) and measuring the impact of this manipulation on the prevalence of dishonest behaviour. Participants performed one of three inducer tasks: the alternative uses task to promote divergent thinking, the remote associates task to promote convergent thinking, or a simple classification task for rule-based thinking. Before and after this manipulation, participants conducted the mind game as a straightforward measure of dishonesty. Dishonest behaviour increased from before to after the intervention, but we found no credible evidence that this increase differed between induced mindsets. Exploratory analyses did not support any relation of trait creativity and dishonesty either. We conclude that the influence of creative thinking on unethical behaviour seems to be more ambiguous than assumed in earlier research or might be restricted to specific populations or contexts.

Resumen: Introducción: la integridad académica se define como la adopción por parte del estudiantado de valores que rigen su formación profesional como la honestidad, la confianza, la responsabilidad, el respeto y la justicia. En los programas de farmacia las faltas a la integridad académica llegan hasta el 90%, encontrándose entre los principales factores las razones socioeconómicas, personales y académicas. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar los factores que influyen en la integridad académica del alumnado de Química y Farmacia de la Universidad Católica del Norte. Métodos: estudio descriptivo de corte transversal, que incluyó al estudiantado de Química y Farmacia, a quienes se les aplicó una encuesta de 31 enunciados con respuesta en escala tipo Likert, que permitió recopilar los factores que influyen en la integridad académica. Resultados: de los 113 estudiantes, 60,2% fueron mujeres, edad promedio 23,1 ± 3,2 años y 16 (14,1%) correspondieron a las cohortes 2020-2021. Las principales motivaciones que percibió el alumnado para cometer actos deshonestos fueron razones «socioeconómicas, socioculturales y familiares» y «características personales», como el miedo a perder la beca, salir eliminado de la carrera o reprobar el curso. La comparación de las cohortes 2020-2021 con el resto de las generaciones evidenció diferencias significativas en las percepciones agrupadas en la categoría «socioeconómicas, socioculturales y familiares» (p = 0,002). Conclusión: reconocer las causas de la deshonestidad académica permiten focalizar la implementación de estrategias preventivas hacia el desarrollo de una cultura de integridad académica y de habilidades actitudinales de autoeficacia en el estudiantado, que contribuyan a una formación y desempeño ético profesional. Abstract: Introduction: Academic integrity is defined as the adoption by the student body of values that govern their professional training such as honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. In pharmacy programs, lack of academic integrity reaches up to 90%, with socioeconomic, personal, and academic reasons being among the main factors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the factors that influence academic integrity of Chemistry and Pharmacy students at the Universidad Católica del Norte. Methods: Descriptive cross - sectional study, which included Pharmacy students, to whom a survey of 31 statements with responses on a Likert-type scale was applied, which allowed us to collect the factors that influence academic integrity. Results: Out of a total of 113 students, 60.2% were female, average age of 23.1 ± 3.2 years, and 16 (14.1%) corresponded to the 2020-2021 cohorts. The main motivations to commit dishonest acts perceived by the students were “socioeconomic, socio-cultural and family” reasons as well as “personal characteristics”, such as the fear of losing scholarships, failing a course and fear of career failure. The comparison between 2020-2021 cohorts and the rest of the generations showed significant differences in the ''socioeconomic, sociocultural and family'' grouped perceptions category (p = 0.002). Conclusion: Recognizing the causes of academic dishonesty allows us to implement preventive strategies that focus towards the development of an academic integrity based culture and attitudinal skills of self-efficacy in the student body, which contribute to an ethical professional training and performance.

Insufficient sleep is costly to organizations (e.g., direct health costs, cognitive errors, accident risk, and lower labor productivity). In this current study, we examine another more hidden cost associated with insufficient sleep– unethical behaviors. Using a hybrid field/lab experimental approach, participants were randomly assigned to a week of sleep-restriction or well-rested sleep levels in their at-home (naturalistic) environment prior to decision making. We found that sleep restricted participants cheated significantly more in two honesty tasks, while anti-social choices were, surprisingly, not affected. Because sleep restriction promotes reduced deliberation, these results contribute to our understanding of the cognitive underpinnings of decision making. Importantly, these findings have practical implications to managers who want to reduce dishonesty in the workplace. For example, our results suggest that workplace health promotion programs focused on good sleep hygiene would additionally benefit the company in terms of indirectly promoting ethical conduct in the workplace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intrahepatic foreign bodies are rarely reported. Although rare, a few reports of swallowed foreign bodies straying into the liver from the gastrointestinal tract have been published. Herein, we report a case in which an asymptomatic intrahepatic needle was removed laparoscopically. An 81-year-old woman presented to our hospital with an abnormal shadow on her abdominal X-ray image. Abdominal computed tomography displayed a needle-like shadow obliquely lying in the lateral segment of the left lobe of the liver. No subjective symptoms were reported; however, the patient underwent laparoscopic extraction. The postoperative course was good, and the patient was discharged without any complications. We also present a literature review of 27 patients with intrahepatic foreign bodies, a sewing needle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does resource scarcity increase people's inclination to engage in self-serving dishonesty? Whereas some theories suggest so, we found no evidence for this across four studies, but a fifth study revealed that most people (wrongly) believe that it does. More precisely, based on three well-powered preregistered online experiments (overall N= 4,193), complemented by two pilot studies (N= 51 and N = 49, respectively) and one manipulation check study (N =424), we provide evidence that neither exogenously induced resource scarcity nor priming people into a scarcity mindset influences people's inclination to engage in self-serving dishonesty. Furthermore, by linking country-level poverty data to a country-level indicator of self-serving dishonesty based on a recent meta-analysis comprising 47 countries and more than 44,000 participants, we found that people living in poorer countries are no more inclined to engage in self-serving dishonesty than people living in richer countries. Finally, we found that most people--and especially men and people low in Agreeableness versus Anger--wrongly believe that people living in poorer countries are more willing to engage in self-serving dishonesty (N= 658). Overall, our investigation adds new evidence to the burgeoning literature on the link between resource scarcity (in the form of poverty) and unethical behavior (in the form of self-serving dishonesty). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the image of an attorney as characterized in Old Polish literature from the 16th and 17th centuries. It reflected, to some extent, the attitude of the people of the time (primarily the nobility) towards the legal profession. There is no doubt that the perception of attorneys by Old Polish society was unequivocally negative. They were portrayed as greedy, dishonest men, liars with no respect for the law and even instigators of non-compliance with the law. Literary works and political writings broadly condemned such behaviors. However, this stereotype applied only to professional attorneysat- law. By no means were non-professional agents (attorneys in fact) attacked, nor was the institution of the power of attorney itself criticized. It seems that this sort of critical attitude was not estate-based (many attorneys were noblemen), although it is possible that the low descent of lawyers influenced the virulence of the criticism. The paper attempts to answer the question as to what extent the literary image of an attorney corresponded to reality. It seems that the works comprised objective reflections on the legal profession and the emotional attitudes of individuals (including the authors themselves) or social groups. It is noteworthy that these pieces of literature often regarded the entire Polish legal system of the time as dysfunctional. Nevertheless, the recurrence of motifs such as greediness or dishonesty gives reason to believe that at least some of these allegations were not unfounded. At the same time, it should be noted that this image of a lawyer corresponded with the stereotype present in European and non- European culture from antiquity to contemporary times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When there is direct competition for a position of power (promotion, elected office, etc.), competitors are tempted to cheat to increase their chances of winning. If they do so successfully, then how they rationalize their cheating can determine how they treat the losers of the competition. In this paper, we explore how the winners of a promotion tournament treat the losers, using a two stage laboratory experiment run in Canada and the United Arab Emirates. In the first stage, subjects compete to earn the role of the dictator in a dictator game, which takes place in the second stage. We vary whether or not subjects can cheat during the competition. The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows: (1) cheating significantly increases altruism in some tournament winners, (2) winners who cheat the most are significantly less altruistic than winners who cheated only a little, (3) there are significant differences in cheating behavior across the two populations, and (4) cheating behavior can be at least partially attributed to differences in intelligence and beliefs across the two populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The case of R v Stringer and Dean provides a unique insight into issues of dishonesty and possible jury nullification in offences designed to control corporate misbehaviour. The jury were unconvinced of the defendants' dishonest state of mind in the first (and to date only) case to be tried under the UK's cartel offence. This was despite no attempt being made to dispute the existence of the cartel or present evidence in their defence. The paper asks whether the trial highlights flaws in the concept of dishonesty or reflects a broader problem of jury nullification in offences relating to corporate misconduct. It concludes that although dishonesty is unpredictable and can be easily challenged in the context of business misconduct, there is also a significant danger that juries question the legitimacy of treating cartels and other forms of business misconduct as crime, regardless of how an offence is designed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• We analyze the impact of information and communication on misreporting of performance in teams of two. • Both team members get the same payoff but report independently. • Informing players 2 about the reports of players 1 reduces misreporting. • Letting players 1 send messages to players 2 reduces misreporting by players 2. • Information transmission and communication thus reduce misreporting. We extend the experimental analysis of misreporting performance in real effort tasks (cheating) to situations where two members of a team perform the task sequentially and decide independently on their potentially inflated reports. We vary three factors in our experiment: whether no players, only players 2, or both players can misreport; whether players 2 learn the report of players 1; and whether players 1 can send a message to players 2 requesting honest or dishonest behavior. Our data yield two main insights. First, higher reports by players 1 lead to higher reports by players 2, i.e. misreporting is reinforcing. Second, allowing players 1 to send a message suggesting that players 2 either report honestly or a minimum number of correct solutions reduces misreporting by players 2. There are two channels for this. First, most players 1 request an honest report. Second, players 2 misreport far less when they receive the honest message, but, compared to the treatments without messages, hardly change their reports when they are asked to report a minimum number of correct solutions. We find a similar, though less pronounced, asymmetric response when players 2 learn the reports of players 1. These findings suggest that communication and information transmission can reduce cheating, and that there are notable spillover effects of honesty even in anonymous environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In daily life, women often experience various forms of sexual objectification such as being stared at in public settings and receiving unsolicited sexual remarks on social media. These incidents could have damaging effects on women's physical and mental health, necessitating ways to respond to the experience. Researchers have provided burgeoning evidence demonstrating the effects of sexual objectification on various psychological, emotional, and cognitive outcomes. However, relatively few researchers have tested how sexually objectified people behaviorally react to the objectification experience. To address this knowledge gap, we aimed to test whether sexual objectification increases dishonesty among women and reveal one potential underlying psychological mechanism. We predicted that sexual objectification increases dishonesty serially through higher levels of relative deprivation and lower levels of self-regulation. We conducted two experiments (valid N = 150 and 279, respectively) to test the predictions and found that participants who experienced sexual objectification reported greater dishonest tendencies than those who did not (Experiments 1 and 2). Moreover, relative deprivation and self-regulation serially mediated the effect of sexual objectification on dishonesty (Experiment 2). In the current experiments, we highlight the essential role of relative deprivation and self-regulation in explaining how sexual objectification increases dishonesty and various related forms of antisocial behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between academic dishonesty and students' attitudes towards school offences. The research included 347 respondents from primary (the seventh and eighth grades) and secondary (the second and third grades) schools in the Republic of Serbia. The Measurement of Dishonest Behaviour (MDB) was used to assess several types of dishonest behaviour, while the School Offences Scale (SOS) was used to evaluate the attitudes towards school offences. According to the findings, there is a significant positive relationship between dishonest behaviour and students' attitudes towards school offences. The total score of students' attitudes has the highest relationship with the subscale of dishonest behaviour connected to Deception, while the total score of dishonest behaviour has the highest correlation with the subscale Playing Truant. Additionally, there are significant differences regarding cheating in schools between the younger and older students; it was observed that the older students had higher scores on both scales. The findings of canonical correlation analysis, which focused on the relationship between the sets of behavioural scales and attitudinal scales, are also discussed. Additionally, the relationships between the attitudes towards school offence and dishonest behaviour are explained through the Theory of Planned Behaviour, while possible instructions for predicting dishonest behaviours, reducing absenteeism from classes, and other methods of reducing cheating, are outlined in the conclusion.

When people see that others lie for financial profit, they are more likely to lie themselves. But do people search for information about others' behavior in ethically tempting situations? And among those who search, what type of information do they search for? Specifically, do people search for information about others' dishonesty in particular, to justify their future transgressions, or do they search for information about others' behavior in general to learn about the descriptive social norm? Across four financially incentivized experiments (Ntotal = 2642), participants engaged in a task in which they could lie for profit. Before starting their task, participants could search for information about others' behavior in the same task. Results reveal that when people search for information, they do so in order to learn about the descriptive norm, not to intentionally learn about others' dishonesty. When the decision to search for information results in observing more dishonest others, participants become more dishonest themselves. Testing a boundary condition revealed that when information search is costly (vs. free), people search for less information, observe less dishonest others, and subsequently are less dishonest themselves. Findings suggest that in settings where people may act dishonestly, information about others behavior should be costly to obtain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Technological advancements have transformed our business as well as social interactions. A recent trend is the increasing use of smartphones for work and customer engagement. Given that smartphones have been associated with a heightened sense of personal ownership and moral disengagement we argue that this may have negative implications for ethical behavior. Method: To evaluate this conjecture we ran an experiment comparing dishonesty when using pen and paper, a desktop computer, or a smartphone. We make this comparison in both a setting where dishonesty benefits another (mutual-gain) and one where it harms another (constant-sum). Results: We find higher levels of dishonesty when using a smartphone than pen and paper. We find relatively high levels of dishonesty when using a desktop computer in the mutual-gain setting but low levels in the constant-sum setting. Discussion: Our results are consistent with the conjecture that smartphone use can lead to less ethical behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dishonesty has received increased attention from many professionals in recent years for its relevance in many social areas such as finance and psychology, among others. Understanding the mechanisms underlying dishonesty and the channels in which dishonesty operates could enable the detection and even prevention of dishonest behavior. However, the study of dishonesty is a challenging endeavor; dishonesty is a complex behavior because it imposes a psychological and cognitive burden. The study of this burden has fostered a new research trend that focuses on cognition's role in dishonesty. This paper reviews the theoretical aspects of how such cognitive processes modulate dishonest behavior. We will pay special attention to executive functions such as inhibitory processes, working memory, or set-shifting that may modulate the decision to be (dis)honest. We also account for some frameworks in cognitive and social psychology that may help understand dishonesty, such as the Theory of Mind, the role of creative processes, and discourse analyses within language studies. Finally, we will discuss some specific cognitive-based models that integrate cognitive mechanisms to explain dishonesty. We show that cognition and dishonest behavior are firmly related and that there are several important milestones to reach in the future to advance the understanding of dishonesty in our society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why do so many adolescents cheat despite judging that cheating is wrong? Two studies tested a new model of cheating in high school. In Study 1, 85 high schoolers in the Western U.S. reported their perceptions, evaluations, and motivations surrounding their own and hypothetical cheating. In Study 2, 83 teachers reported their views about cheating; we also analyzed course syllabi. About half of the adolescents reported unintentional cheating, and many judged their own cheating—but not hypothetical cheating—as acceptable. Decisions to cheat were responses to competing pressures, low value placed on the assignment, and other considerations. Study 2 revealed teacher‐student disagreements about cheating, and minimal content about academic integrity in syllabi. The findings supported the proposed model of adolescent cheating. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Content and timing of honesty nudges are varied in an online experiment • Effect of nudges is independent from whether subjects already made decisions • Adding information about monitoring increases the effect of nudges • Personalized information has no additional effect • Nudges decrease dishonesty of those (presumably) honest as well as those dishonest We use a ten-round online mind game to determine whether the effect of honesty nudges depends on timing and content. Reminding individuals about the right thing to do increases honesty. Including information that it is possible to assess an individual's dishonesty strengthens the effect of the intervention. Both types of intervention are similarly effective when they take place before an individual has made any decision or after individuals have played five rounds of the mind game. Nudging an individual after they have made five decisions allows us to add personalized information based on the individual's previous response; however, this does not increase honesty. Examining the reaction to nudges based on previous behavior shows that (presumably) honest and dishonest individuals respond by reducing overreporting. The effect of the different nudge content is driven by those previously dishonest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]