Committed (dis)honesty: A systematic meta-analytic review of the divergent effects of social commitment to individuals or honesty oaths on dishonest behavior.

People feel committed to other individuals, groups, organizations, or moral norms in many contexts of everyday life. Such social commitment can lead to positive outcomes, such as increased job satisfaction or relationship longevity; yet, there can also be detrimental effects to feeling committed. Recent high-profile cases of fraud or corruption in companies like Enron or Volkswagen are likely influenced by strong commitment to the organization or coworkers. Although social commitment might increase dishonest behavior, there is little systematic knowledge about when and how this may occur. In the present project, we reviewed 20,988 articles, focusing on studies that experimentally manipulated social commitment and measured dishonest behavior. We retained 445 effect sizes from 121 articles featuring a total of 91,683 participants across 33 countries. We found no evidence that social commitment increases or reduces dishonest behavior in general. Nonetheless, we did find evidence that the effect strongly depends on the target of the commitment. Feeling committed to other individuals or groups reduces honest behavior (g = -0.17 [-0.24, -0.11]), whereas feeling committed to honesty norms through honesty oaths or pledges increases honest behavior (g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36]). The analysis identified several moderating variables and detected some degree of publication bias across effects. Our findings highlight the diverging effects of different forms of social commitment on dishonest behavior and suggest a combination of the different forms of commitment could be a possible means to combat corruption and dishonest behavior in the organizational context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Morality in minimally deceptive environments.

Psychologists, economists, and philosophers have long argued that in environments where deception is normative, moral behavior is harmed. In this article, we show that individuals making decisions within minimally deceptive environments do not behave more dishonestly than in nondeceptive environments. We demonstrate the latter using an example of experimental deception within established institutions, such as laboratories and institutional review boards. We experimentally manipulated whether participants received information about their deception. Across three well-powered studies, we empirically demonstrate that minimally deceptive environments do not affect downstream dishonest behavior. Only when participants were in a minimally deceptive environment and aware of being observed, their dishonest behavior decreased. Our results show that the relationship between deception and dishonesty might be more complicated than previous interpretations have suggested and expand the understanding of how deception might affect (im)moral behavior. We discuss possible limitations and future directions as well as the applied nature of these findings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

How the minimalist model of ownership psychology can aid in explaining moral behaviors under resource constraints.

The model of ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation proposes that people flexibly navigate cognitive systems of cooperation and competition, thus enabling them to justify unethical behavior. We discuss how this model captures previous accounts of unethical behavior and propose that a disengagement heuristic can help us understand recent findings in the interconnection between scarcity psychology and unethical behavior.

Subjective socioeconomic status and income inequality are associated with self-reported morality across 67 countries.

Individuals can experience a lack of economic resources compared to others, which we refer to as subjective experiences of economic scarcity. While such experiences have been shown to shift cognitive focus, attention, and decision-making, their association with human morality remains debated. We conduct a comprehensive investigation of the relationship between subjective experiences of economic scarcity, as indexed by low subjective socioeconomic status at the individual level, and income inequality at the national level, and various self-reported measures linked to morality. In a pre-registered study, we analyze data from a large, cross-national survey (N = 50,396 across 67 countries) allowing us to address limitations related to cross-cultural generalizability and measurement validity in prior research. Our findings demonstrate that low subjective socioeconomic status at the individual level, and income inequality at the national level, are associated with higher levels of moral identity, higher morality-as-cooperation, a larger moral circle, and increased prosocial intentions. These results appear robust to several advanced control analyses. Finally, exploratory analyses indicate that observed income inequality at the national level is not a statistically significant moderator of the associations between subjective socioeconomic status and the included measures of morality. These findings have theoretical and practical implications for understanding human morality under experiences of resource scarcity.

On the interplay between pain observation, guilt and shame proneness and honesty.

Seeing others in pain can stimulate powerful socio-emotional responses. Does it also make us more moral? In two laboratory experiments, we examined the interplay between pain observation, self-reported guilt and shame, subjective perceptions of pain intensity, and subsequent honest behavior. Watching a confederate perform a moderately painful (vs. non-painful) task did not affect honest behavior in a subsequent die-roll task. Independent of pain observation, there was a positive relationship between self-reported guilt proneness and shame proneness and honesty. More specifically, individuals who are more prone to feeling guilt -and to a lesser extent shame- behaved more honestly. Furthermore, we found weak support for the hypothesis that greater perceived pain (rather than objective pain) is associated with less cheating. We call for further research in the interconnections between perceived pain, guilt, shame, and moral behavior.

Experiment aversion does not appear to generalize.

Over the past decade, governments and organizations around the world have established behavioral insights teams advocating for randomized experiments. However, recent findings by M. N. Meyer et al., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 10723-10728 (2019) and P. R. Heck, C. F. Chabris, D. J. Watts, M. N. Meyer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 18948-18950 (2020) suggest that people often rate randomized experiments as less appropriate than the policies they contain even when approving the implementation of either policy untested and when none of the individual policies is clearly superior. The authors warn that this could cause policymakers to avoid running large-scale field experiments or being transparent about running them and might contribute to an adverse heterogeneity bias in terms of who is participating in experiments. In one direct and six conceptual preregistered replications (total N = 5,200) of the previously published larger-effect studies, using the same main dependent variable but with variations in scenario wordings, recruitment platforms, and countries, and the addition of further measures to assess people's views, we test the generalizability and robustness of these findings. Together, we find that the original results do not appear to generalize. That is, our triangulation reveals insufficient evidence to conclude that people exhibit a common pattern of behavior that would be consistent with relative experiment aversion, thereby supporting recent findings by R. Mislavsky, B. Dietvorst, U. Simonsohn, Mark. Sci. 39, 1092-1104 (2020). Thus, policymakers may not need to be concerned about employing evidence-based practices more so than about universally implementing policies.

Collaborative Cheating in Hierarchical Teams: Effects of Incentive Structure and Leader Behavior on Subordinate Behavior and Perceptions of Leaders.

What facilitates collaborative cheating in hierarchical teams, and what are its outcomes for those engaged? In two preregistered studies (N = 724), we investigated how subordinates are influenced by leaders signaling a willingness to engage in collaborative cheating, and how subordinates perceive such leaders. Participants performed a task in which they could either report their performance honestly, or cheat for financial gain. Each participant was assigned a leader who could choose to check the report's veracity. In Study 1, leaders who checked less often were perceived as more moral, trustworthy, competent, and psychologically closer than leaders who checked more often. This trustworthiness bonus translated to investments in a subsequent trust game. Study 2 revealed that these relationship benefits specifically arise for collaborative cheating, compared to competitive cheating (at the leader's expense). We conclude that collaborative cheating in subordinate-leader dyads strengthens in-group bonds, bringing people closer together and cultivating trust.

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.

Morality in the echo chamber: The relationship between belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and public health support and the mediating role of moral identity and morality-as-cooperation across 67 countries.

Believing in conspiracy theories is a major problem, especially in the face of a pandemic, as these constitute a significant obstacle to public health policies, like the use of masks and vaccination. Indeed, during the COVID-19 pandemic, several ungrounded explanations regarding the origin of the virus or the effects of vaccinations have been rising, leading to vaccination hesitancy or refusal which poses as a threat to public health. Recent studies have shown that in the core of conspiracy theories lies a moral evaluation component; one that triggers a moral reasoning which reinforces the conspiracy itself. To gain a better understanding of how conspiracy beliefs about COVID-19 affect public health containment behaviors and policy support via morality-relevant variables, we analysed comprehensive data from the International Collaboration on the Social & Moral Psychology (ICSMP) of COVID-19, consisting of 49.965 participants across 67 countries. We particularly explored the mediating role of two levels of morality: individual and group-based morality. Results show that believing in conspiracy theories reduces adoption of containment health-related behaviors and policy support of public health measures, but moral identity and morality-as-cooperation significantly mediate this relationship. This means that beliefs in conspiracy theories do not simply constitute antecedents of cognitive biases or failures, nor maladaptive behaviors based on personality traits, but are morally infused and should be dealt as such. Based on our findings, we further discuss the psychological, moral, and political implications of endorsement of conspiracy theories in the era of the pandemic.

Predicting attitudinal and behavioral responses to COVID-19 pandemic using machine learning.

At the beginning of 2020, COVID-19 became a global problem. Despite all the efforts to emphasize the relevance of preventive measures, not everyone adhered to them. Thus, learning more about the characteristics determining attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic is crucial to improving future interventions. In this study, we applied machine learning on the multinational data collected by the International Collaboration on the Social and Moral Psychology of COVID-19 (N = 51,404) to test the predictive efficacy of constructs from social, moral, cognitive, and personality psychology, as well as socio-demographic factors, in the attitudinal and behavioral responses to the pandemic. The results point to several valuable insights. Internalized moral identity provided the most consistent predictive contribution-individuals perceiving moral traits as central to their self-concept reported higher adherence to preventive measures. Similar results were found for morality as cooperation, symbolized moral identity, self-control, open-mindedness, and collective narcissism, while the inverse relationship was evident for the endorsement of conspiracy theories. However, we also found a non-neglible variability in the explained variance and predictive contributions with respect to macro-level factors such as the pandemic stage or cultural region. Overall, the results underscore the importance of morality-related and contextual factors in understanding adherence to public health recommendations during the pandemic.

Morality in the time of cognitive famine: The effects of memory load on cooperation and honesty.

Though human social interaction in general seems effortless at times, successful engagement in collaborative or exploitative social interaction requires the availability of cognitive resources. Research on Dual-Process suggests that two systems, the affective (non-reflective) and the cognitive (reflective), are responsible for different types of reasoning. Nevertheless, the evidence on which system leads to what type of behavioral outcome, in terms of prosociality, is at best contradicting and perplexing. In the present paper, we examined the role of the two systems, operationalized as working memory depletion, in prosocial decision-making. We hypothesize that the nature of the available cognitive resources could affect whether humans engage in collaborative or exploitative social interaction. Using Operation Span to manipulate the availability of working memory, we examined how taxing the cognitive system affects cooperation and cheating. In two experiments, we provide evidence that concurrent load, but not cumulative load is detrimental to cooperation, whereas neither concurrent nor cumulative load seems to affect cheating behavior. These findings are in contrast to several previous assumptions. We discuss limitations, possible explanations, and future directions.

Effectiveness of environmental health and loss framing on household pharmaceutical take-back schemes.

Pharmaceutical pollution poses an emerging environmental and public health problem. Together with increasing medicine use and pharmaceutical manufacturing effluents, improper disposal of household pharmaceutical waste significantly adds to this issue, despite pharmaceutical take-back schemes having been established in many countries. Even where take-back schemes are available return rates remain low. Previous studies have used only survey and interview methodologies and therefore merely described the situation. This study goes further, exploring not only the effects of the availability of information on pharmaceutical take-back schemes but also the effects of the framing of information provided to individuals on their intentions and reported behaviours to collect unused and/or expired household pharmaceuticals and return them to a pharmacy. The data were collected throughout three preregistered, randomised experiments with representative samples (N = 3754). The results show that tapping into individuals' pre-existing conception of the problem and psychological biases through the delivery of environmental health, loss framing information highly increased the odds of returning household pharmaceutical waste. This result is long-lasting (Studies 2 and 3), is found in various European countries (Study 1), and remains robust in all studies. Based on the results, we suggest that, in the context of household pharmaceutical waste management, psychologically informed, proactive approaches combined with targeted local action and services can reduce the psychological and practical barriers to pro-health and pro-environmental behaviour. The findings are used to support a policy recommendation that is cost-efficient, easy to use, and effective.

National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic.

Changing collective behaviour and supporting non-pharmaceutical interventions is an important component in mitigating virus transmission during a pandemic. In a large international collaboration (Study 1, N = 49,968 across 67 countries), we investigated self-reported factors associated with public health behaviours (e.g., spatial distancing and stricter hygiene) and endorsed public policy interventions (e.g., closing bars and restaurants) during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020). Respondents who reported identifying more strongly with their nation consistently reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies. Results were similar for representative and non-representative national samples. Study 2 (N = 42 countries) conceptually replicated the central finding using aggregate indices of national identity (obtained using the World Values Survey) and a measure of actual behaviour change during the pandemic (obtained from Google mobility reports). Higher levels of national identification prior to the pandemic predicted lower mobility during the early stage of the pandemic (r = -0.40). We discuss the potential implications of links between national identity, leadership, and public health for managing COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Drivers and social implications of Artificial Intelligence adoption in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact people worldwide-steadily depleting scarce resources in healthcare. Medical Artificial Intelligence (AI) promises a much-needed relief but only if the technology gets adopted at scale. The present research investigates people's intention to adopt medical AI as well as the drivers of this adoption in a representative study of two European countries (Denmark and France, N = 1068) during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results reveal AI aversion; only 1 of 10 individuals choose medical AI over human physicians in a hypothetical triage-phase of COVID-19 pre-hospital entrance. Key predictors of medical AI adoption are people's trust in medical AI and, to a lesser extent, the trait of open-mindedness. More importantly, our results reveal that mistrust and perceived uniqueness neglect from human physicians, as well as a lack of social belonging significantly increase people's medical AI adoption. These results suggest that for medical AI to be widely adopted, people may need to express less confidence in human physicians and to even feel disconnected from humanity. We discuss the social implications of these findings and propose that successful medical AI adoption policy should focus on trust building measures-without eroding trust in human physicians.

Harmonisation of Pharmaceutical Take-Back Systems in the EU.

When medicines enter the environment, they harm living species and ecosystems. Improper disposal of household pharmaceutical waste increases the concentration of pharmaceuticals in the environment and thus their detrimental impacts. Since 2004, the EU has obliged its Member States to establish 'an appropriate collection system' for unused and/or expired medication. However, as no implementation guidelines exist, large differences in the systems and their use remain. Pressure for adoption of guidelines harmonising the systems across the EU has been increasing. We address the question whether such harmonisation could mitigate pharmaceutical pollution, and which regulatory measures would be appropriate. To answer this, we conduct a comparative investigation of the systems' regulation and an empirical study of citizens' beliefs and behaviour across four European countries. We find a potential for increasing the effectiveness of pharmaceutical take-back systems through their harmonisation and conclude that the EU has the competence and tools to regulate this.

Self-control or social control - what determines sleep hygiene in bed-sharing couples?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate intimate partners' impact on sleep hygiene with focus on the temporal dimension and differential predictors of sleep hygiene in co-sleepers and individual sleepers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Habitual co-sleepers and individual sleepers (n=102) completed a cross-sectional, self-report, in-lab, digital survey on sleep hygiene, habitual sleeping arrangement, self-control, depressiveness, and sociodemographic parameters. RESULTS: The relationship between sleeping arrangement and sleep hygiene in co-sleepers was time-dependent with an initial steep incline and a subsequent plateau at approximately one year of co-sleeping routine. Co-sleepers with more than one year of unaltered sleeping arrangement had significantly better sleep hygiene than co-sleepers with less than one-year or individual sleepers. More than one-year continuity of the sleeping arrangement moreover robustly predicted sleep hygiene in co-sleepers whereas self-control was the dominant predictor in individual sleepers. CONCLUSION: Amongst others, our findings support the idea that insomnia treatment could be improved by becoming sensitive to the habitual sleeping arrangement.