Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 20, 2025

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime
Published on: May 3, 2016
Do Not Tell Me More; You Are Honest: A Preconceived Honesty Bias
David Pascual-Ezama1,2,3, Adrián Muñoz4, Drazen Prelec2,5,6
1Accounting and Financial Administration Department, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Detecting dishonesty is challenging, but some individuals, like submaximizers and radical dishonest people, show better honesty detection skills. Information and verbal cues aid dishonesty detection, while non-verbal cues are key for honesty.
Area of Science:
- Psychology
- Behavioral Economics
- Social Science
Background:
- Previous research indicates low accuracy in detecting dishonesty, even with additional information and verbal cues.
- A new classification of dishonesty profiles prompts investigation into individual differences in predictive ability regarding dishonesty.
- Understanding who can better detect (un)ethical behavior is crucial for social and economic interactions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate whether individuals classified by dishonesty profiles differ in their ability to detect the (un)ethical behavior of others.
- To determine the impact of information availability and cue types (verbal vs. non-verbal) on detecting honesty and dishonesty.
- To examine the influence of preconceived honesty bias on the accuracy of detecting honesty and dishonesty.
Main Methods:
- An experiment was conducted using video clips from a popular UK TV show where contestants made honesty decisions regarding money.
- 1,582 participants from an online Mechanical Turk sample evaluated contestants' (dis)honest actions under varying conditions.
- Analysis focused on accuracy rates, the influence of information and cue types (verbal cues vs. non-verbal cues), and the effect of honesty bias.
Main Results:
- Overall accuracy in detecting (dis)honesty was not significantly better than chance.
- Submaximizers and radical dishonest individuals demonstrated superior ability in detecting honesty compared to maximizers and non-radicals, respectively.
- Increased information and verbal cues improved dishonesty detection, whereas non-verbal cues were more effective for honesty detection.
- A preconceived honesty bias enhanced specificity (honesty detection) but reduced sensitivity (dishonesty detection).
Conclusions:
- Individual differences in dishonesty profiles correlate with varying abilities to detect honesty.
- The type of information and cues available significantly influences the accuracy of detecting honesty versus dishonesty.
- Pre-existing biases, such as an honesty bias, can skew the perception and accurate detection of ethical and unethical behavior.
More Related Videos
06:51The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling
Published on: April 6, 2018
08:24The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
Published on: August 25, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Hindsight Biases
Self-Serving Bias
Confirmation Biases
Motivational Bias
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
Unrealistic Optimism Bias