Introduction: (Dis)honest decision making and their influence factors is a topic that is still poorly understood. Neuroeconomics researchers about this subject are currently in early stages, but they are essential to understand human cognition about moral decision-making and its implications on our society. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate behavior related to dishonesty in a Brazilian sample. Methods: We used same approach from Mazar et al. (2008) adapted to local context in a 3 x 3 between-subjects factorial design (possibility to cheat vs. payment levels).Possibility to cheat factorslevels: self-report performance(recycle), self-report with post-test evaluationbut no participants’ awareness (shredder), and no possibility to cheat (control). Payment levels: $0.50 and $2 monetary units (Brazilian reais) per matrix solved, and no monetary incentive. Results: We observed a significant interaction between possibility to cheat and monetary incentive.Participants exhibit more dishonest behavior with lower monetary incentive ($0.50) and even more when there was no momentary incentive, and especially when having possibility to cheat (recycle vs. control) but not in the shredder condition.Interestingly, there was no difference with higher monetary incentive ($2) across conditions.Conclusions: Our results reproduced to a certain extent the original study: maybe people are less careful the lower is the monetary incentive.However, Brazilians are maybe more distrustful (shredder condition) and more careful with higher incentive ($2).Moreover, the dishonest behavior found in this sample is similar to the original study, and even less dishonest with higher monetary incentive, a result that points against the Brazilian self common sense.
Comissão Organizadora
Ciências e Cognição
Comissão Científica
Ferramenta completa de submissão, avaliação e publicação de anais para eventos científicos.
