Contemplation and Conversation: Subtle Influences on Moral Decision Making

Abstract

This research investigated the role of contemplation, conversation (conceptualized as social contemplation), and explanations in right-wrong decisions. Several theories suggest that contemplation or morally-oriented conversations will promote ethical decisions and that immediate choice or self-interested conversations will not; other theories suggest that individuals' explanations will reinforce their decisions. An experimental task tempting people to lie supported all of these predictions. In addition, truth-tellers viewed the situation as morally-oriented and non-truth-tellers viewed it as oriented around self-interest, both before and after their decisions. These findings provided the basis for a new, process model of moral decision making.

Who Lies? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Sex, Age, and Education on Honesty

“…Previous studies have explored what makes people act dishonestly by focusing on social and moral preferences (Biziou-van-Pol, 2015;Levine & Schweitzer, 2014;Levine & Schweitzer, 2015;Shalvi & de Dreu, 2014), incentives (Dreber & Johannesson, 2008;Erat & Gneezy, 2012;Fischbacher & Föllmi-Heusi, 2013;Gneezy, 2005;Kajackaite & Gneezy, 2015;Mazar, Amir & Ariely, 2008;Sutter, 2009), the role of group-serving lies versus individual-serving lies (Cohen, Gunia, Kim-Jun & Murnighan, 2009;Conrads, Irlenbusch, Rilke & Walkowitz, 2013;Gino, Ayal & Ariely, 2013;Wiltermuth, 2011), and the role of manipulating cognitive resources (Gino, Schweitzer, Mead & Ariely, 2011;Shalvi, Eldar & Bereby-Meyer, 2012;Gunia et al, 2012;van't Veer, Stel & van Beest, 2014;Capraro, 2017). …”

Ethical Decision-Making: The Role of Self-Monitoring, Future Orientation, and Social Networks

“…This attention has been due in part to the surfeit of high-profile cases reported in the popular press (e.g., Enron, WorldCom, Parmalat, Siemens, Petrobras) as well as the vast sums of money involved. According to Garrett (2014) As attitudes and values regarding unethical behavior are not formed in isolation (Gunia, Wang, Huang, Wang, & Murnighan, 2012;Martin, Cullen, Johnson, & Parboteeah, 2007) and corruption typically involves the complicity of other parties (Ayios, Jeurissen, Manning, & Spence, 2014;Brass, Butterfield, & Skaggs, 1998;Nielsen, 2003), a key element in understanding the emergence and perpetuation of corruption is relational networks. The currency of network development is social capital, which constitutes an investment in social relations with expected returns (Lin, 2001).…”

The Good, the Bad, and the Angry: An Experimental Study on the Heterogeneity of People's (Dis)honest Behavior

“…Connecting to the debate about whether honesty is deliberative or intuitive (Capraro, Finally, we looked at the effect of time pressure on honesty. Previous research, using static settings, has led to mixed results, with some studies finding that time pressure increases dishonesty (Gunia et al, 2012;Shalvi et al, 2012), yet others finding that time pressure increases honesty (Capraro, 2017a; Konrad et al, forthcoming). In our dynamic setting, we find that time pressure has no effect on honesty, but it does have an effect on the distribution of responses.…”