Unethical behavior in the field: Demographic characteristics and beliefs of the cheater
By A. Bucciol, Fabio Landini, Marco Piovesan. 2013
106 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Information Systems and Management, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/71610d4b011b4c7daede00ed0c880282d5ccb503
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
- Isabel Thielmann
- Morten Moshagen
- Daniel W. Heck
- Holger A. Rau
- Armin Falk
- Anke Becker
- Benjamin E. Hilbig
- Johannes Abeler
In Information Systems and Management
In Safety Research
- Anke Becker
- Johannes Abeler
- Holger A. Rau
- Isabel Thielmann
- Morten Moshagen
- Benjamin E. Hilbig
- Armin Falk
- Daniel W. Heck
Citations in the corpus
- Representative evidence on lying costs (2014, background): “Similarly, Bucciol et al. (2013) study free-riding in public transportation in Italy and find that 43% of passengers evade the fare.”
- Who lies? A large-scale reanalysis linking basic personality traits to unethical decision making (2018, background): “A common approach to study unethical decision making are so-called cheating paradigms from behavioral ethics, such as the coin-toss task (Bucciol & Piovesan, 2011) or the dice-roll task (Fischbacher & Föllmi-Heusi, 2013).”
- Gender Differences in Honesty: The Role of Social Value Orientation (2017, background): “…(2014) emphasize that despite honesty is not a fixed trait, most of the studies report that women cheat less than men.1 This is shown in the lab (e.g., Erat and Gneezy, 2012; Houser et al., 2012; Conrads et al., 2014; Kocher et al., 2016)2 and in the field (Azar et al., 2013; Bucciol et al., 2013).”