糖心原创

Abstract: This paper focuses on norm-following considerations as motivating  behavior when lying opportunities are present. To obtain evidence on what makes it harder/easier to lie, we hypothesize that subjects might use belief-manipulation in order to justify their lying. We employ a two-stage variant of a cheating paradigm, in which subjects’ beliefs are elicited in stage 1 before performing the die  task in stage 2. In stage 1: a) we elicit the subjects’ beliefs about majoritarian (i) behavior or (ii) normative beliefs in a previous session, and b) we vary whether participants are (i) aware or (ii) unaware of the upcoming opportunity to lie. 

We show that belief manipulation happens, and takes the form of people convincing themselves that lying is widespread. In contrast with beliefs about the behavior of others,  we find that beliefs about their normative convictions are not distorted, since believing that the majority disapproves of lying does not inhibit own lying. These findings are consistent with a model where  agents are motivated by norm-following concerns, and where honest behavior is a strong indicator of disapproval of lying but disapproval of lying is not a strong indicator of honest behavior. We provide evidence that supports this hypothesis.