Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Are implicit attitudes toward dishonesty associated with self-serving dishonesty? Implications for the reliability of the IAT

Bibliographic Data

ID9005637
AuthorsHirokazu Hatta (Kyoto University), Ryuhei Ueda (0000-0003-1512-5861, National Institute of Information and Communications Technology), Hiroshi Ashida (0000-0002-2930-402X, Kyoto University), Nobuhito Abe (0000-0002-9897-4414, Kyoto University, corresponding author)
Year2022
Volume100
Pages104285-104285
Publication date2022-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Experimental Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-1031 • E-ISSN: 1096-0465
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104285
OpenAlexW4210516216
LanguageEN
References cited49

Experiments assessing the prevalence and magnitude of dishonesty have provided a large body of empirical findings regarding the cognitive nature of honesty. However, the personal factors that regulate dishonest behavior have yet to be fully clarified. This study examined two factors that potentially inhibit dishonesty—implicit attitudes toward dishonesty and executive control. In Study 1, the participants completed the Implicit Association Test (IAT), which measured their implicit attitudes toward dishonesty, and a working memory (WM) task, which was used to index executive control. The participants subsequently completed an incentivized coin-flip prediction task wherein they were given real and repeated opportunities for dishonest reward acquisition and punishment avoidance. The results revealed that individuals showing stronger negative implicit attitudes toward dishonesty engaged in a lower frequency of dishonest behavior for punishment avoidance, although this effect was marginal. In contrast, WM capacity was not associated with variations in dishonest reward acquisition and punishment avoidance. A follow-up experiment on other-serving dishonesty, where dishonest reward acquisition and punishment avoidance were credited to two other anonymous participants, revealed that neither implicit attitudes toward dishonesty nor WM capacity was associated with dishonest behavior. An additional preregistered experiment in Study 2 demonstrated that the association between implicit attitudes toward dishonesty and self-serving dishonesty for punishment avoidance was again marginal. While it is tempting to conclude that implicit attitudes toward dishonesty are associated with self-serving dishonesty, the present study provides only weak evidence that should be interpreted with great caution. Implications for the reliability of the IAT are discussed

Academic Dishonesty · Cheating · Dishonesty · Honesty · Implicit attitude · Punishment (psychology · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Psychology

  • Impulsive versus reflective influences on health behavior

    Wilhelm Hofmann, Malte Friese et al.•Health Psychology Review•2008

  • Honesty Requires Time (and Lack of Justifications)

    Open Access•Shaul Shalvi, Ori Eldar et al.•Psychological Science•2012

  • Controlled and automatic human information processing

    Richard M Shiffrin, Walter Schneider•Psychological Review•1977

  • Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others

    Open Access•Francesca Gino, Shahar Ayal et al.•Journal of Economic Behavior &…•2013

  • Who Shalt Not Kill? Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity, Executive Control, and Moral Judgment

    Open Access•Adam Moore, Adam B Moore et al.•Psychological Science•2008

  • Temporal Stability of Implicit and Explicit Measures

    Open Access•Bertram Gawronski, Mike Morrison et al.•Personality and Social Psychology…•2017

  • Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice

    Amos Tversky, Daniel Kahneman•The Quarterly Journal of Economics•1991

  • Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1

    Open Access•Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder et al.•Behavior Research Methods•2009

  • Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition

    Jonathan St B T Evans•Annual Review of Psychology•2008

  • Reflective and Impulsive Determinants of Social Behavior

    Open Access•Fritz Strack, Roland Deutsch•Personality and Social Psychology…•2004

  • A comparative investigation of seven indirect attitude measures

    Open Access•Yoav Bar-Anan, Brian A Nosek•Behavior Research Methods•2013

  • Target Article

    Hal R Arkes, Philip E Tetlock•Psychological Inquiry•2004

  • Is the victim Max (Planck) or Moritz ? How victim type and social value orientation affect dishonest behavior

    Open Access•Ivan Soraperra, Ori Weisel et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2018

  • The Single Category Implicit Association Test as a measure of implicit social cognition

    Andrew Karpinski, Ross B Steinman•Journal of Personality and Social…•2006

  • Too tired to tell the truth

    Open Access•Nicole L Mead, Roy F Baumeister et al.•Journal of Experimental Social…•2009

  • The frame of the game

    Open Access•Simon Schindler, Stefan Pfattheicher•Journal of Experimental Social…•2016

  • Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test

    Anthony G Greenwald, Brian A Nosek et al.•Journal of Personality and Social…•2003

  • Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition

    Anthony G Greenwald, Debbie E Mcghee et al.•Journal of Personality and Social…•1998

  • The truth about lies

    Philipp Gerlach, Kinneret Teodorescu et al.•Psychological Bulletin•2019

  • Replicating patterns of prospect theory for decision under risk

    Open Access•Kai Ruggeri, Sonia Alí et al.•Nature Human Behaviour•2020

Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae