Prosocial lies: Causes and consequences

Exploring lie frequency and emotional experiences of deceptive decision-making in autistic adults

Deception is a multi-faceted social behaviour that is pervasive in human communication. Due to differences in social communication and experiences, autistic and non-autistic adults may contrast in how they respond to situations that elicit deceptive decision-making. This study examined whether autistic and non-autistic adults differed in their general lie frequency, their inclination to produce different lie types, and their emotional experiences of lying. Fifty-eight non-autistic and fifty-six autistic university students matched on age and gender completed self-report measures of their general lying patterns, how often they lied in the past 24 hours, and whether they would lie across hypothetical scenarios with differing beneficiaries (self, other, group) and motivations (protective, beneficial). The groups did not significantly differ in their general lying behaviour or frequency of lies told over 24 hours. Yet, autistic adults indicated that they would be significantly less likely to lie in group scenarios and would experience increased difficulty, more guilt, and greater concerns about their believability when lying. These results advance theoretical understanding by suggesting that autistic adults' deceptive decision-making may be context-dependent. Future research may benefit from examining autistic deception across numerous social situations as more general lie frequency measures may be insensitive to nuanced population differences.Lay AbstractLying, a universal social behaviour, is frequent in everyday communication. Due to differences in social communication and experiences, autistic and non-autistic adults may react differently in situations where they must decide whether to lie or tell the truth. We investigated whether autistic and non-autistic adults differ in their general lying behaviour (e.g. how often they lie) and their likelihood of lying in a range of hypothetical social scenarios with different motivations (why people lie - to benefit or protect) and orientations (who people lie for; themselves, other, a group). We also examined participants' emotional experiences of lying and truth-telling. We found that autistic and non-autistic adults' general lying frequencies and emotional experiences were similar. However, the social scenario responses revealed that autistic adults would be less likely to lie to benefit or protect a social group they are part of. Moreover, autistic adults indicated that they would find lying more difficult across all social scenarios, experience more guilt, and would be less confident that their lie would be believed. This research highlights how autistic adults' lying may be context-dependent and considers how a reduction in the likelihood of lying for their social group could increase strain on autistic adults' social relationships.

Neural correlates of how egoistic, altruistic, and mixed motivations modulate the influence of self-deception on deceptive behavior

Using event-related potentials, this study investigated the interplay between self-deception and varying motivations in influencing deceptive behavior. Participants in either the self-deception or nonself-deception condition were instructed to make deceptive decisions under different motivational contexts. Behavioral responses and neural activity were recorded throughout the decision-making process. Behaviorally, there were no significant differences in deception proportions between the self-deception and nonself-deception conditions under egoistic or mixed motivations. However, under altruistic motivation, participants in the self-deception condition engaged in more deceptive behavior compared to those in the nonself-deception condition. Event-related potential results revealed no significant differences in P2 and N2 amplitudes between the self-deception and nonself-deception conditions under egoistic or mixed motivations. However, under altruistic motivation, the self-deception condition was associated with reduced P2 amplitudes and more negative N2 amplitudes relative to the nonself-deception condition. Additionally, no significant interaction in P3 amplitudes was found between self-deception and different motivations. These findings suggest that the effect of self-deception on deceptive behavior is modulated by different motivations. Specifically, egoistic or mixed motivations might be associated with a self-serving tendency in deceptive behavior, while altruistic motivation appeared to enhance deceptive behavior in the self-deception condition, potentially to foster a prosocial image.

Advanced theory of mind and children's prosocial lie-telling in middle childhood: A training study

Children's advanced theory of mind (AToM) is concurrently associated with their prosocial lie-telling. However, the causal link between AToM and prosocial lie-telling has not yet been demonstrated. To address this gap, the current study adopted a training paradigm and investigated the role of AToM in children's prosocial lie-telling in middle childhood. A total of 66 9- and 10-year-old children who did not demonstrate any prosocial lie-telling in a disappointment gift paradigm at the baseline were recruited and randomly assigned to either the experimental group (n = 32) or an active control group (n = 34). The experimental group underwent a conversation-based training program of four sessions. The results showed significantly greater gains in AToM at the posttest for the experimental group children compared with the control group children, controlling for family socioeconomic status, children's literacy score, working memory, and inhibition. More important, the experimental group children were more likely to tell prosocial lies than the control group, even after controlling for the pretest AToM and other covariates. However, the training effects faded at the 6-month follow-up test after the training's completion. These findings provide the first evidence for the causal role of AToM in the development of prosocial lie-telling in middle childhood. The fade-out effect is discussed in the context of educational interventions.

Unethical prosocial behaviour and self-dehumanization: The roles of social connectedness and perceived morality

Unethical prosocial behaviour (UPB) refers to acts where people violate widely held moral rules to benefit others. In light of previous research on the association between immoral behaviours and dehumanization, we examined whether and how engaging in UPB would impact the tendency to self-dehumanize. Across four studies (valid N = 1640), we found that UPB led to less self-dehumanization than unethical proself behaviour, which was mediated sequentially by social connectedness and perceived morality (Studies 2-4). Moreover, the comparison between UPB and ethical prosocial behaviour indicated that UPB did not necessarily lead to more self-dehumanization than ethical prosocial behaviour (Study 4). Although UPB was rated as less moral, it was associated with similar levels of social connectedness as ethical prosocial behaviour. These results have significant implications for research on morality and dehumanization and highlight the role of social connectedness in reducing dehumanization.

Cheating to benefit others? On the relation between Honesty-Humility and prosocial lies

OBJECTIVE

Among basic personality traits, Honesty-Humility yields the most consistent, negative link with dishonest behavior. The theoretical conceptualization of Honesty-Humility, however, suggests a potential boundary condition of this relation, namely, when lying is prosocial. We therefore tested the hypothesis that the association between Honesty-Humility and dishonesty weakens once lying benefits someone else, particularly so if this other is needy.

METHODS

In two online studies (Study 1: N = 775 in Germany; Study 2: N = 737 in the UK, preregistered), we measured self-reported Honesty-Humility and dishonest behavior in incentivized cheating paradigms in which the beneficiary of participants' dishonesty was either the participants themselves, a "non-needy" other (e.g., another participant), or a "needy" other (e.g., a charity).

RESULTS

We found support for the robustness of the negative association between Honesty-Humility and dishonesty, even if lying was prosocial.

CONCLUSION

Individuals high in Honesty-Humility largely prioritize honesty, even if there is a strong moral imperative to lie; those low in Honesty-Humility, by contrast, tend to lie habitually and thus even if they themselves do not directly profit monetarily. This suggests that (un)truthfulness may be an absolute rather than a relative aspect of Honesty-Humility, although further systematic tests of this proposition are needed.

Cognitive empathy boosts honesty in children and young adolescents

Children and young adolescents often tend to behave dishonestly in order to serve their self-interests. This study focused on how empathic abilities affect children's tendency to deceive others. Deception is the act of causing others to form a false belief to get them to act in a way that serves the deceiver's interests. As such, it requires the ability to predict how others might use the provided information. In two experiments, 274 participants (aged 10-16 years) played a game in which they could send a deceptive message to another participant to boost their own payoff at the other player's expense. We measured participants' cognitive and emotional empathy using different measures. We found that a measure of cognitive empathy, namely the fantasy scale, was associated with less deception of another player when that other player was not identified and was presented only as "Player B." However, when Player B was identified by name, empathy did not predict deception. In such cases, the only factors affecting deception rates were the gain for the participant (higher possible gains lead to more deception) and loss to the other player (higher possible losses lead to less deception). Overall, the findings suggest that even by 11 years of age, children can understand the impact of their unethical behavior on another child and adjust their actions accordingly. However, when the other child is not identified, children need to possess high levels of cognitive empathy toward imagined individuals to resist the temptation to deceive the other child.

Parenting by lying and children's lying to parents: The moderating role of children's beliefs

How are children socialized about lying? One way is parental modeling of lying given that parents tell various lies to their children for parenting purposes, which is a practice known as parenting by lying. Importantly, how children perceive and interpret the lying behavior around them may be crucial to how they then learn to lie. Yet, we do not know how children's perceptions of different types of parental lies drive this socialization. In a comprehensive birth cohort of parent-child dyads (N = 564; children aged 11 and 12 years) in Singapore, we collected multi-informant reports of instrumental lies (parental lies told for child compliance) and white lies (parental lies told to instill positive emotions), children's belief in parental lies, and children's lying to parents. We found greater consistency in parent and child reports of instrumental lies than of white lies and that children reported greater belief in instrumental lies than in white lies. Children's reported exposure to instrumental lies was associated with greater lying to parents. However, for white lies this relationship was evident only when children had moderate to low beliefs in parental lies. Examining the interplay between parental lies and children's beliefs in those lies, the current study illuminates the potential pathways to children's lying behaviors.

Moral evaluations of children's truths and lies in a prosocial context: The role of reputation

The current investigation examined the influence of a child's reputation on 7- to 12-year-olds' (Study 1; N = 146) and parents' (Study 2; N = 198) moral evaluations of the child's blunt truths (i.e., truths told despite possible hurt feelings) and prosocial lies (i.e., lies told to protect another's feelings). In Study 1, children were read a series of vignettes in which a child, described as being smart, kind, or clean (with clean serving as the irrelevant control reputation), told either the blunt truth or a prosocial lie that varied in content (opinions or facts). In Study 2, parents evaluated the same vignettes and reputations as in Study 1 with the addition of a troublemaker reputation. The reputation of the child protagonist significantly influenced both children's and parents' moral evaluations. Children rated the kind child's lies more positively, and parents rated the smart child's truths and lies less positively, than those of the clean (control) child when told about opinions. No differences were noted in the facts content condition. Findings suggest that a child's perceived reputation may influence both children's and adults' moral interpretations of the child's honesty behaviors.

Laughter and lies: Unraveling the intricacies of humor and deception

Deception and humor are ubiquitous in interpersonal interactions and intricately interrelated. In this article, we review and integrate prior research on humor and deception and propose a theoretical model - the Interpersonal Humor Deception Model (IHDM) - to understand the interpersonal effects of humor on deception. We argue that humor can both promote and curtail the use of deception, as well as influence the detection of deception and responses to detected deception (retraction, retaliation, and the restoration of trust). The specific effects of humor depend on whether it is successful or unsuccessful. In all, our article provides a theoretical framework to guide research on humor and deception and offers important insights into the costs and benefits of humor in negotiations, organizations, and everyday life.

Do contemplative practices make us more moral?

Contemplative practices are a staple of modern life and have historically been intertwined with morality. However, do these practices in fact improve our morality? The answer remains unclear because the science of contemplative practices has focused on unidimensional aspects of morality, which do not align with the type of interdependent moral functioning these practices aspire to cultivate. Here, we appeal to a multifactor construct, which allows the assessment of outcomes from a contemplative intervention across multiple dimensions of moral cognition and behavior. This offers an open-minded and empirically rigorous investigation into the impact of contemplative practices on moral actions. Using this framework, we gain insight into the effect of mindfulness meditation on morality, which we show does indeed have positive influences, but also some negative influences, distributed across our moral functioning.

Other-Benefiting Lying Behavior in Preschool Children and Its Relation to Theory of Mind and Empathy

The present study examined children's lies to help others obtain benefits (other-benefiting lying) and its relation to theory of mind (ToM) and empathy among 3-5-year-old preschool children. One hundred nine children were recruited from preschools in China. A modified hide-and-seek paradigm was used to measure children's other-benefiting lying behavior, a ToM scale was used to measure children's ToM abilities, and an empathy scale was used to measure children's empathy abilities. Results showed that children tended to tell more lies to help other to get benefits as age increased, and further analyses showed that this other-benefiting lying was related to children's ToM component of false belief understanding and their cognitive empathy performance. These findings provide evidence that cognitive factors play important roles in children's lying to help others.

Prosocial lie-telling in preschoolers: The impacts of ethnic background, parental factors, and perceived consequence for the partner

This study explored prosocial lie-telling behavior in 4- to 5-year-old children from two ethnic groups: European Canadian (n = 49; excluding Eastern European Canadian) and Chinese Canadian (n = 45). Children completed an online experiment involving two real-life politeness situations. In the first situation, children were asked whether they thought someone with a red mark on their face looked okay for a photo or a Zoom party (Reverse Rouge Task). In the second situation, upon hearing the researcher’s misconception about two pieces of artwork, children were asked whether they agreed with the researcher (Art Rating Task). Parents completed questionnaires that measured their levels of collectivist orientation and parenting styles. Contrary to our hypotheses, the likelihood of children telling a prosocial lie did not vary as a function of their ethnic group or the presence of a perceived consequence for the partner, nor was it predicated by parental collectivist orientation. Interestingly, prosocial liars were more likely to have authoritative parents, whereas blunt-truth tellers were more likely to have permissive parents. These findings have important implications for the ways in which certain parenting styles influence the socialization of positive politeness in children. In addition, the similar rates of prosocial lying across the two ethnic groups suggest that children who are born and raised in Canada may be much more alike than different in their prosocial lie-telling behavior, despite coming from different ethnic backgrounds.