Prosocial Lies: When Deception Breeds Trust

By E. Levine, Maurice E. Schweitzer. 2014

283 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science

How researchers see this paper

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

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Adrian Weller
2. Adam M. Grant
3. Valerio Capraro
4. M. Bolino

In Safety Research

1. M. Bolino
2. Laura Biziou-van-Pol
3. Adrian Weller
4. Adam M. Grant
5. Arianna Novaro
6. Valerio Capraro
7. Andrés Occhipinti Liberman
8. Jana Haenen

In Sociology and Political Science

1. M. Bolino
2. Adam M. Grant
3. Laura Biziou-van-Pol
4. Adrian Weller
5. Arianna Novaro
6. Valerio Capraro
7. Andrés Occhipinti Liberman
8. Jana Haenen

Citations in the corpus

• Challenges for Transparency (2017, background): “In recent work, Levine and Schweitzer (2015) demonstrated settings where prosocial lies increased trust.”
• Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences? (2015, background): “In a subsequent work, Levine and Schweitzer (2015) show that trusters in a trust game allocate more money to people who have told a white lie in a previous game than to people who have told the truth.”
• Gender differences in lying in sender-receiver games: A meta-analysis (2017, background): “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 &…”
• 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): “Employees can act prosocially in ways that break rules (Morrison, 2006), commit injustice (Gino & Pierce, 2010), demonstrate dishonesty (Erat & Gneezy, 2012; Levine & Schweitzer, 2015), and violate ethical standards (Umphress, Bingham, & Mitchell, 2010).”
• Transparency: Motivations and Challenges (2017, background): “ople what they want to hear.” However, as we can sense from the following phrases themselves, it can be difficult to hear the ‘harsh truth’ from someone speaking with ‘brutal honesty’. In recent work, Levine and Schweitzer (2015) demonstrated settings where prosocial lies increased trust. Prosocial l”
• Transparency: Motivations and Challenges (2019, background): “In recent work, [41] demonstrated settings where prosocial lies increased trust.”