Lying is sometimes ethical, but honesty is the best policy: The desire to avoid harmful lies leads to moral preferences for unconditional honesty.

People believe that some lies are ethical, while also claiming that "honesty is the best policy." In this article, we introduce a theory to explain this apparent inconsistency. Even though people view prosocial lies as ethical, they believe it is more important-and more moral-to avoid harmful lies than to allow prosocial lies. Unconditional honesty (simply telling the truth, without finding out how honesty will affect others) is therefore seen as ethical because it prevents the most unethical actions (i.e., harmful lies) from occurring, even though it does not optimize every moral decision. We test this theory across five focal experiments and 10 supplemental studies. Consistent with our account, we find that communicators who tell the truth without finding out how honesty will affect others are viewed as more ethical, and are trusted more, than communicators who look for information about the social consequences of honesty before communicating. However, the moral preference for unconditional honesty attenuates when it is certain that looking for more information will not lead to harmful lies. Overall, this research provides a holistic understanding of how people think about honesty and suggests that moral rules are not valued because people believe all rule violations are wrong, but rather, because they believe some violations must be avoided entirely. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

On being honest about dishonesty: The social costs of taking nuanced (but realistic) moral stances.

Despite the well-documented costs of word-deed misalignment, hypocrisy permeates our personal, professional, and political lives. Why? We explore one potential explanation: the costs of moral flexibility can outweigh the costs of hypocrisy, making hypocritical moral absolutism a preferred social strategy to admissions of moral nuance. We study this phenomenon in the context of honesty. Across six studies (total N = 3545), we find that communicators who take flexible honesty stances ("It is sometimes okay to lie") that align with their behavior are penalized more than hypocritical communicators who take absolute honesty stances ("It is never okay to lie") that they fail to uphold. Although few people take absolute stances against deception themselves, they are more trusting of communicators who take absolute honesty stances, relative to flexible honesty stances, because they perceive absolute stances as reliable signals of communicators' likelihood of engaging in future honesty, regardless of inconsistent behavior. Importantly, communicators-including U.S. government officials-also anticipate the costs of flexibility. This research deepens our understanding of the psychology of honesty and helps explain the persistence of hypocrisy in our social world. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Can mentor organizations impact mentor outcomes? Assessing organizational norms on mentor intent to stay and willingness to "go the extra mile".

The current study explores how organizational norms within mentoring organizations predict mentor outcomes over and above individual mentor characteristics. Specifically, this study examines whether mean levels (as an indicator of organizational norms) of mentors' perceptions of their relationship quality with mentees' families predict mentor satisfaction, mentor intent to stay and mentor extra-role prosocial behavior over and above individual mentor perception of their relationship quality with mentees' families. Multilevel modeling was used to assess 204 mentors nested within 37 mentoring organizations. The current study found that mentor organization averages of perceived relationship quality with mentees' families positively predicted mentor extra-role prosocial behavior over and above the individual mentor perceptions of relationship quality with mentees' families. Additionally, organizational averages negatively predicted mentor intent to stay, while individual mentor perceptions positively predicted mentor intent to stay. Results have implications for mentoring organizations to create organizational norms that reduce burnout, increase continuity of mentor relationships, and help mentors go above and beyond on behalf of their mentees and mentoring organization.

The effect of hunger on children's sharing behavior and fairness preferences.

How does feeling hungry affect children's sharing and evaluations of others' moral decision making? To examine this question, we gave 4- to 9-year-old children the opportunity to share resources with an anonymous other child and to evaluate third-party resource allocation decisions between hungry and full recipients. We also measured children's subjective reports of their own hunger, predicting that hungry children would be less generous in their own sharing and more likely to prefer distributions that favor the hungry recipient. Children's sharing increased with age, as did positive evaluations of equitable third-party distributions. Hungrier children were less likely to share overall, but particularly when sharing food-relevant resources. Hunger did not influence third-party resource allocation evaluations, and children still expected fairness from others even when behaving differently themselves.

The development of children's preferences for equality and equity across 13 individualistic and collectivist cultures.

A concern for fairness is a fundamental and universal element of morality. To examine the extent to which cultural norms are integrated into fairness cognitions and influence social preferences regarding equality and equity, a large sample of children (N 2,163) aged 4-11 were tested in 13 diverse countries. Children participated in three versions of a third-party, contextualized distributive justice game between two hypothetical recipients differing in terms of wealth, merit, and empathy. Social decision-making in these games revealed universal age-related shifts from equality-based to equity-based distribution motivations across cultures. However, differences in levels of individualism and collectivism between the 13 countries predicted the age and extent to which children favor equity in each condition. Children from the most individualistic cultures endorsed equitable distributions to a greater degree than children from more collectivist cultures when recipients differed in regards to wealth and merit. However, in an empathy context where recipients differed in injury, children from the most collectivist cultures exhibited greater preferences to distribute resource equitably compared to children from more individualistic cultures. Children from the more individualistic cultures also favored equitable distributions at an earlier age than children from more collectivist cultures overall. These results demonstrate aspects of both cross-cultural similarity and divergence in the development of fairness preferences.