Large stakes and little honesty? Experimental evidence from a developing country

Leibbrandt, Andreas; Maitra, Pushkar; Neelim, Ananta

doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2018.05.007

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, other studies paint a different picture: implying that most people are in fact honest (24)(25)(26)(27) even when very large financial sums are at stake (28). shown that honesty is also sensitive to context: for example, people are less likely to lie when it concerns their performance in a task than when the outcome of the task was determined by luck (30).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where are the liars? Extremely low levels of dishonesty in an experiment where individuals are incentivized to cheat.

Raihani¹,

Lamb²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals cheat more in groups than when alone, though the exact reasons for this are not clear. Here, we use a lab-based experiment (N = 116) to ask whether (i) variation in risk-proneness and (ii) the perception of subjective social costs, such as being perceived negatively by others or the consequences of letting others down, motivate people to behave dishonestly. In addition, we asked whether self-reported social and ethical risk preferences impact dishonesty and whether these interact with social pressure. The most striking result of this study is the very low levels of dishonesty observed: despite using established methods that have demonstrated high levels of dishonesty in previous studies, only seven (6 %) participants were dishonest in this task. It is possible that contextual factors greatly affect dishonesty, though we also discuss the possibility that previous experiments have over-estimated the extent to which people will lie for financial rewards in laboratory experiments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where are the liars? Extremely low levels of dishonesty in an experiment where individuals are incentivized to cheat.

Raihani¹,

Lamb²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Relatedly, researchers have shown that stake size matters. For instance, using a lab-in-the-field experiment, Leibbrandt et al (2018) show that participants are more likely to lie when the stakes are very large. Related to this, lab-in-the-field experiments enable researchers to understand and measure behavioural characteristics that have traditionally been considered unobservable in surveys (e.g.…”

Section: Lab-in-the-field Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lab-in-the-Field Experiments: Perspectives from Research on Gender

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper highlights t he contributions made b y lab-in-the-field experiments, which are also known as artefactual, framed and extra-lab experiments. We present a curated sample of lab-in-the-field experiments and discuss ho w t he y c an b e conducted o n t heir o w n o r combined with conventional laboratory experiments, natural experiments, randomised control trials and surveys to provide unique insights into the behaviour of a diverse population. Using our recent research on gender and leadership, w e demonstrate h o w lab-in-the-field experiments hav e offered new perspectives ab o ut gender differences i n decision-making. Finally, w e out line t h e e t hic al and implementational challenges researchers may face while conducting these experiments, and share some of the strategies we employed to address them.

show abstract

“…Relatedly, researchers have shown that stake size matters. For instance, using a lab-in-the-field experiment, Leibbrandt et al (2018) show that participants are more likely to lie when the stakes are very large. Related to this, labin-the-field experiments enable researchers to understand and measure behavioural characteristics that have traditionally been considered unobservable in surveys (e.g.…”

Section: Lab-in-the-field Experiments As a Complement To Surveysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender

Gangadharan

Jain

Maitra

et al. 2021

JER

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper highlights the contributions made by lab-in-the-field experiments, which are also known as artefactual, framed and extra-lab experiments. We present a curated sample of lab-in-the-field experiments and discuss how they can be conducted on their own or combined with conventional laboratory experiments, natural experiments, randomised control trials and surveys to provide unique insights into the behaviour of a diverse population. Using our recent research on gender and leadership, we demonstrate how lab-in-the-field experiments have offered new perspectives about gender differences in decision-making. Finally, we outline the ethical and implementational challenges researchers may face while conducting these experiments and share some of the strategies we employed to address them.

show abstract

Large stakes and little honesty? Experimental evidence from a developing country

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

Where are the liars? Extremely low levels of dishonesty in an experiment where individuals are incentivized to cheat.

Where are the liars? Extremely low levels of dishonesty in an experiment where individuals are incentivized to cheat.

Lab-in-the-Field Experiments: Perspectives from Research on Gender

Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About