Does resource scarcity increase self-serving dishonesty? Most people wrongly believe so.

Does resource scarcity increase people's inclination to engage in self-serving dishonesty? Whereas some theories suggest so, we found no evidence for this across four studies, but a fifth study revealed that most people (wrongly) believe that it does. More precisely, based on three well-powered preregistered online experiments (overall N = 4,193), complemented by two pilot studies (N = 51 and N = 49, respectively) and one manipulation check study (N = 424), we provide evidence that neither exogenously induced resource scarcity nor priming people into a scarcity mindset influences people's inclination to engage in self-serving dishonesty. Furthermore, by linking country-level poverty data to a country-level indicator of self-serving dishonesty based on a recent meta-analysis comprising 47 countries and more than 44,000 participants, we found that people living in poorer countries are no more inclined to engage in self-serving dishonesty than people living in richer countries. Finally, we found that most people-and especially men and people low in Agreeableness versus Anger-wrongly believe that people living in poorer countries are more willing to engage in self-serving dishonesty (N = 658). Overall, our investigation adds new evidence to the burgeoning literature on the link between resource scarcity (in the form of poverty) and unethical behavior (in the form of self-serving dishonesty). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Commitment to honesty oaths decreases dishonesty, but commitment to another individual does not affect dishonesty.

Social commitment influences our behavior in various ways. Recent studies suggest that social commitment to other individuals or groups can increase dishonest behavior while feeling commitment to moral norms might decrease it. Here we show in a pre-registered series of 7 studies investigating the influence of social commitment on dishonest behavior by sampling 7566 participants across three countries (the UK, the US, and Mexico) that commitment to moral norms via honesty oaths might decrease dishonesty (OR = 0.79 [0.72, 0.88]). To the contrary, we found no credible evidence that social commitment to other individuals increases dishonesty (OR = 1.08 [0.97, 1.20]). Finally, we observed that commitment to moral norms was less effective if participants were committed to another individual at the same time (OR = 0.95 [0.86, 1.06]). Our findings point at the potential effectiveness of honesty oaths, while the observed effect sizes were small compared to previous studies.

Association between Reactogenicity and Immunogenicity after Vaccination with BNT162b2.

It is not clear whether there is an association between adverse reactions and immune response after vaccination. Seven hundred and thirty-five vaccinees from our University Medical Center vaccination clinic provided information about sex, age and adverse reactions after first and second vaccination with BNT162b2. Adverse reactions were categorized into three groups: no or minor on the injection side, moderate (not further classified) and severe-defined as any symptom(s) resulting in sick leave. We chose 38 vaccinees with the most severe adverse reactions and compared their humoral and T-cell-mediated immune responses after second vaccination with those of 38 sex and age matched controls without or only minor injection-side related adverse reactions. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG titers were detectable in all participants (median 5528; range 958-26,285). Men with severe adverse reactions had 1.5-fold higher median SARS-CoV-2 RBD IgG titers compared to men without adverse reactions (median 7406 versus 4793; p < 0.001). Similarly; neutralization activity was significantly higher in men with severe adverse reactions (half maximal inhibitory concentrations (IC50) median 769 versus 485; p < 0.001). Reactogenicity did not influence humoral immune response in women nor T-cell-mediated immune response in any sex. To conclude; adverse reactions after vaccination with BNT162b2 do influence humoral immune response yet only in men and are not a prerequisite for a robust antibody response.

Dishonesty as a signal of trustworthiness: Honesty-Humility and trustworthy dishonesty.

Trustworthiness is a foundation of well-functioning relationships and societies, and thus often perceived as a socially normative behaviour. Correspondingly, a broad array of research found that people tend to act in a trustworthy way and signal their trustworthiness to others, and that trustworthiness is rewarded. Herein, we explore whether this motivation to behave trustworthily can have socially undesirable effects in terms of leading to dishonesty targeted at fulfilling the trustor's expectations (i.e. trustworthy dishonesty). Furthermore, we examine how the basic trait of Honesty-Humility, which has consistently been found to be linked to both higher honesty and trustworthiness, relates to trustworthy dishonesty, where honesty and trustworthiness are at odds. Specifically, we conducted three pre-registered studies (N = 7080), introducing a novel behavioural game, the lying-trust game, where participants had a chance to lie to act trustworthily. In two studies, we found that, when offered 'full trust', participants high in Honesty-Humility (i.e. the top 10%) engaged in trustworthy dishonesty, i.e. lied in order to avoid maximizing their own incentive at the cost of minimizing the incentive of their trustor. This pattern was not present when the trustor offered minimal trust only, as well as among participants low in Honesty-Humility (i.e. the bottom 10%).