Experimental Assessment of Cheating Prevalence in the Czech Republic as an Example of a Post-Communist Country

Novakova, Julie; Houdek, Petr; Jolič, Jan; Flegr, Jaroslav

doi:10.1080/01639625.2017.1410381

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Czech Republic is a post-communist country and it now ranks 44th in the Corruption Perceptions Index (the higher the country ranks, the lower are the perceived corruption rates) whereas Israel ranks 35th (Transparency International, 2019). Nevertheless, a laboratory study on a sample of Czech students revealed quite high preferences for honesty (Novakova et al, 2018). In any case, the number of field experiments is insufficient for any exact cross-country comparisons.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A field experiment on dishonesty: A registered replication of Azar et al. (2013)

Procházka

Fedoseeva

Houdek

2021

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A field experiment on dishonesty: A registered replication of Azar et al. (2013)

Procházka

Fedoseeva

Houdek

2021

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Studies therefore use controlled laboratory and field experiments to be able to identify the participants’ behavior based on the experimental manipulations they face: sizes of the expected reward for behaving dishonestly, opportunities for cheating, means of rationalizing dishonest behavior, in-group v. out-group mentality etc. ( Gino et al, 2009 ; Rosenbaum et al, 2014 ; Irlenbusch and Villeval, 2015 ; Shalvi et al, 2015 ; Jacobsen et al, 2017 ; Novakova et al, 2017 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Perspective on Research on Dishonesty: Limited External Validity Due to the Lack of Possibility of Self-Selection in Experimental Designs

Houdek

2017

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this perspective article is to show that current experimental evidence on factors influencing dishonesty has limited external validity. Most of experimental studies is built on random assignments, in which control/experimental groups of subjects face varied sizes of the expected reward for behaving dishonestly, opportunities for cheating, means of rationalizing dishonest behavior etc., and mean groups’ reactions are observed. The studies have internal validity in assessing the causal influence of these and other factors, but they lack external validity in organizational, market and other environments. If people can opt into or out of diverse real-world environments, an experiment aimed at studying factors influencing real-life degree of dishonesty should permit for such an option. The behavior of such self-selected groups of marginal subjects would probably contain a larger level of (non)deception than the behavior of average people. The article warns that there are not many studies that would enable self-selection or sorting of participants into varying environments, and that limits current knowledge of the extent and dynamics of dishonest and fraudulent behavior. The article focuses on suggestions how to improve dishonesty research, especially how to avoid the experimenter demand bias.

show abstract

“…We also demonstrated higher generalizability of the effect of selection by using samples from different countries as China, Czechia, and English speaking countries (USA, UK, Canada, etc.) (Cheek, 2017;Henrich, Heine & Norenzayan, 2010;Novakova et al 2018). Moreover, participants who chose the version where they could cheat to obtain a financial gain in Study 1 and 2 cheated more than those who were assigned to it at random.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection effects on dishonest behavior

Houdek

Bahník²,

Hudík

et al. 2021

Judgm. decis. mak.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many situations people behave ethically, while elsewhere dishonesty reigns. Studies of the determinants of unethical behavior often use random assignment of participants in various conditions to identify contextual or psychological factors influencing dishonesty. However, in many real-world contexts, people deliberately choose or avoid specific environments. In three experiments (total N = 2,124) enabling self-selection of participants in two similar tasks, one of which allowed for cheating, we found that participants who chose the task where they could lie for financial gain reported a higher number of correct predictions than those who were assigned it at random. Introduction of financial costs for entering the cheating-allowing task led to a decrease in interest in the task; however, it also led to more intense cheating. An intervention aimed to discourage participants from choosing the cheating-enabling environment based on social norm information did not have the expected effect; on the contrary, it backfired. In summary, the results suggest that people low in moral character are likely to eventually dominate cheating-enabling environments, where they then cheat extensively. Interventions trying to limit the preference of this environment may not have the expected effect as they could lead to the selection of the worst fraudsters.

show abstract

Experimental Assessment of Cheating Prevalence in the Czech Republic as an Example of a Post-Communist Country

Cited by 3 publications

References 47 publications

A field experiment on dishonesty: A registered replication of Azar et al. (2013)

A field experiment on dishonesty: A registered replication of Azar et al. (2013)

A Perspective on Research on Dishonesty: Limited External Validity Due to the Lack of Possibility of Self-Selection in Experimental Designs

Selection effects on dishonest behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About