Articles features
People lie only when they can save their face
 London, April 27  
 People are likely to cheat on
 a task in favour of their self-interest only when the situation 
provides them enough room to save their face, says a study.
To 
maintain the idea that we are moral people, we tend to lie or cheat only
 to the extent that we can justify our transgressions, the study said.
It suggests that situational ambiguity is one such avenue for justification that helps us preserve our lily-white image.
"Whether
 in sensational corporate scandals or more ordinary transgressions, 
individuals often violate ethical principles to serve their 
self-interest," said the researchers from the Ben-Gurion University of 
the Negev in Israel.
"Our results suggest that such ethical 
failures are mostly likely to occur in settings in which ethical 
boundaries are blurred," they added.
Findings showed that people 
are apt to cheat in favour of their self-interest but only when the 
situation is ambiguous enough to provide moral cover.
"In 
ambiguous settings, people's motivation directs their attention towards 
tempting information, shaping their self-serving lies," said 
co-researcher Andrea Pittarello.
Using an "ambiguous dice" 
paradigm, the researchers had participants look at a computer screen 
that displayed the rolls of a total of six dice, while their gaze was 
monitored using eye-tracking equipment.
The participants were asked to report the number rolled for the die appearing closest to a designated target on the screen.
In
 one condition, participants were told that they would be paid according
 to the value they reported observing - thus, reporting a die roll of 
six would result in a bigger payoff than a die roll of five.
The 
participants could maximise their income by reporting a six for every 
trial, but then their cheating would be obvious and difficult to 
justify.
In another condition, participants were told they would be paid for the accuracy of their report.
Overall,
 the participants reported the correct value in about 84 percent of the 
pay-for-report trials and about 90 percent of the pay-for-accuracy 
trials.
"These results indicate that situations in which 
ambiguity is high are especially prone to self-serving interpretation of
 available information.
"If you seek to boost own or 
organisational ethical behaviour - then reduce ambiguity and make things
 clear," the researchers wrote.
The study was published in the journal Psychological Science.
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	