Cheating more when the spoils are split

By Scott S. Wiltermuth. 2011

269 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Information Systems and Management, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/56fbf242e727f92f370b10318df5363b6ed45e9e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Information Systems and Management

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Gender differences in lying in sender-receiver games: A meta-analysis (2017, unknown): “For example, scholars have explored the role of social and moral preferences (Biziou-van-Pol et al, 2015; Levine & Schweitzer, 2014; Levine & Schweitzer, 2015; Shalvi & de Dreu, 2014; Weisel & Shalvi, 2015), the role of incentives (Dreber & Johannesson, 2008; Erat & Gneezy, 2012; Fischbacher & Föllm”
Blind forces (2014, methodology): “For example, work by Wiltermuth (2011) and Umphress and colleagues (Umphress & Bingham, 2011; Umphress, Bingham, & Mitchell, 2010) indicates that individuals are more likely to use justifications when they can claim that their self-serving behavior also helps others (e.g., peers; cf. Apel &…”
Blind loyalty? When group loyalty makes us see evil or engage in it (2016, background): “People who care about morality often act unethically for the benefit of others (e.g., Gino & Pierce, 2009, 2010; Wiltermuth, 2011) but don’t view themselves or their actions as immoral (Ashforth & Anand, 2003; Benson, 1985) and tend to discount, rationalize, or justify the unethical actions of other”
When Giving Money Does Not Work: The Differential Effects of Monetary Versus In-Kind Rewards in Referral Reward Programs (2014, unknown): “Prior research has demonstrated that people are more likely to cheat when the benefit of doing so is split with another person, even an anonymous stranger, because of the mitigated perception of immorality (Wiltermuth 2011).”
Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences? (2015, background): “Wiltermuth (2011) finds that people are more likely to cheat when the benefit of doing so is split between themselves and another person, even when the other beneficiary is a stranger with whom they had no interaction.”
Why Do We Lie? A Practical Guide To The Dishonesty Literature (2018, background): “Wiltermuth (2011) and Ploner and Regner (2013) find that cheating is more pronounced when the outcome of certain dishonest acts is or can be shared with another person, indicating that a Pareto white lie situation leads to more dishonest behaviour than traditional white lie situations.”
The Bright Side of Being Prosocial at Work, and the Dark Side, Too: A Review and Agenda for Research on Other-Oriented Motives, Behavior, and Impact in Organizations (2016, background): “There is also evidence that people cheat more when the spoils are split: “people may be more likely to behave dishonestly for their own benefit if they can point to benefiting others as a mitigating factor” (Wiltermuth, 2011, p. 115).”
Agreement and Similarity in Self-Other Perceptions of Moral Character (2013, unknown): “…choices is extensive and incontrovertible (e.g., Self-Other Perceptions of Moral Character 33 Cohen, Gunia, Kim-Jun, & Murnighan, 2009; Gino & Pierce, 2009; Gino, Schweitzer, Mead, & Ariely, 2011; Kern & Chugh, 2009; Schweitzer, Ordóñez, & Douma, 2004; Wiltermuth, 2011; Zhong, Bohns, & Gino, 2010).”
Being Honest About Dishonesty: Correlating Self‐Reports and Actual Lying (2014, methodology): “To address this limitation, we administered a second cheating task, the Words task (Wiltermuth, 2011), in which a clear-cut discrimination between honest and dishonest subjects is possible.”
When Job Performance is All Relative: How Family Motivation Energizes Effort and Compensates for Intrinsic Motivation (2017, background): “For example, in a series of experiments, participants cheated more if the “spoils” were split with another (versus kept for the self), revealing how some use important ends to justify immoral means (Wiltermuth, 2011).”
Understanding ordinary unethical behavior: why people who value morality act immorally (2015, unknown): “People seem to stretch the truth [19], to the point that still allows them to rationalize their behavior [18,20 ,21].”