Collaborative Dishonesty: A Meta-Analytic Review

• Published in: Psychological bulletin Vol. 147; no. 12; pp. 1241 - 1268
• Main Authors: Leib, Margarita, Köbis, Nils, Soraperra, Ivan, Weisel, Ori, Shalvi, Shaul
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States American Psychological Association 01-12-2021
• Subjects: Collaboration; Deception; Dishonesty; Ethics; Female; Financial incentives; Group Decision Making; Honesty; Human; Humans; Lying; Male; Males; Mass Gatherings; Men; Meta-analysis; Moderation; Morality; Morals; Partners; Prosocial behavior; behavioral ethics; group decision-making; honesty; collaboration; morality
• ISSN: 0033-2909; 1939-1455
• DOI: 10.1037/bul0000349

Although dishonesty is often a social phenomenon, it is primarily studied in individual settings. However, people frequently collaborate and engage in mutual dishonest acts. We report the first meta-analysis on collaborative dishonesty, analyzing 87,771 decisions (21 behavioral tasks; k = 123; nparticipants = 10,923). We provide an overview of all tasks used to measure collaborative dishonesty, and inform theory by conducting moderation analyses. Results reveal that collaborative dishonesty is higher (a) when financial incentives are high, (b) in lab than field studies, (c) when third parties experience no negative consequences, (d) in the absence of experimental deception, and (e) when groups consist of more males and (f) younger individuals. Further, in repeated interactions, group members' behavior is correlated-participants lie more when their partners lie-and lying increases as the task progresses. These findings are in line with the justified ethicality theoretical perspective, suggesting prosocial concerns increase collaborative dishonesty, whereas honest-image concerns attenuate it. We discuss how findings inform theory, setting an agenda for future research on the collaborative roots of dishonesty.
Public Significance Statement
We present the first meta-analysis on collaborative dishonesty-when groups can lie to increase the group's profits-covering 87,771 decisions made by 10,923 people engaging in 21 different experimental tasks. Results reveal various situational and personal factors shape collaborative dishonesty, including, for example, that group members affect each other's behavior over time. We propose that prosocial and honest-image concerns drive collaborative dishonesty.