Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
Published on: April 18, 2017
Intuitive or deliberative dishonesty: The effect of abstract versus concrete victim
Jiayu Cheng1, Haoran Wang1, Yue Liu1
1Department of Psychology, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, China.
None:
There has been ongoing debate over whether people are intuitively honest or intuitively dishonest. A recent social harm account was proposed to address this debate: dishonesty is intuitive when cheating inflicts harm on an abstract other while honesty is intuitive when cheating inflicts harm on a concrete other. This pre-registered and well-powered study (n = 764) aims to directly test this account by using a time pressure manipulation. Specifically, we examined whether time pressure (versus self-paced conditions) would lead to increased cheating depending on whether the harmed party was concrete or abstract. The results showed no significant effect of time pressure on cheating behavior. However, the harm-type manipulation produced findings that contradicted those reported in previous studies. Given the low replication rates and reliance on controversial experimental manipulations in this area, our findings underscore the importance of further pre-registered research to rigorously evaluate the roles of time pressure and social harm in shaping intuitive (dis)honesty.
Related Concept Videos
Reason and Intuition
Radical Formation: Abstraction
Even though homolysis produces radicals, it is different from radical...
Concrete
Workability of Concrete
Concrete's workability is determined by its resistance to internal forces that arise...
Reinforcements in Concrete
Prestressed Concrete

