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.