IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0216238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of air pollution on convenience-based or other-oriented lies

Author

Listed:
  • Song Wu
  • Tingbin Wang

Abstract

Besides endangering human health, air pollution has profound effects on individuals’ cognition, emotions, and behavior. Previous studies have found that air pollution could increase self-oriented lies. We summarized two explanations for this phenomenon: (1) air pollution makes people less likely to regard lies as unethical, and (2) air pollution makes people more likely to approach materials rewards. The present study mainly measured three kinds of lies—self-convenience, other-convenience, and other-material lies—to investigate these two explanations. Participants were asked to imagine living in either a polluted or a clean situation in two online studies and one laboratory study. The results showed that air pollution did not influence self-convenience lies (Studies 1 and 2), and clean air increased both other-convenience and other-material lies (Studies 2 and 3). According to these results, both explanations are supported. The theoretical implications of the present study are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Song Wu & Tingbin Wang, 2019. "The effect of air pollution on convenience-based or other-oriented lies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-11, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216238
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216238
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0216238&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0216238?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:6:p:538-548 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:4:p:345-355 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Lewis, Alan & Bardis, Alexander & Flint, Chloe & Mason, Claire & Smith, Natalya & Tickle, Charlotte & Zinser, Jennifer, 2012. "Drawing the line somewhere: An experimental study of moral compromise," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 718-725.
    4. Levine, Emma E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2015. "Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 88-106.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ming, Yaxin & Deng, Huixin & Wu, Xiaoyue, 2022. "The negative effect of air pollution on people's pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 72-87.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Potters, Jan & Stoop, Jan, 2016. "Do cheaters in the lab also cheat in the field?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 26-33.
    2. Gill, David & Prowse, Victoria & Vlassopoulos, Michael, 2013. "Cheating in the workplace: An experimental study of the impact of bonuses and productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 120-134.
    3. Kouchaki, Maryam & Kray, Laura J., 2018. "“I won't let you down:” Personal ethical lapses arising from women’s advocating for others," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 147-157.
    4. Kray, Laura J. & Kennedy, Jessica A. & Van Zant, Alex B., 2014. "Not competent enough to know the difference? Gender stereotypes about women’s ease of being misled predict negotiator deception," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 61-72.
    5. Cao, Qian & Li, Jianbiao & Niu, Xiaofei, 2022. "White lies in tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2018. "Building trust by tearing others down: When accusing others of unethical behavior engenders trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 111-128.
    7. Moore, Alexander K. & Lewis, Joshua & Levine, Emma E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2023. "Benevolent friends and high integrity leaders: How preferences for benevolence and integrity change across relationships," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    8. Matteo Ploner, 2022. "Lie for me: An experiment about delegation, efficiency, and morality," CEEL Working Papers 2202, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    9. Buckle, Georgia E. & Füllbrunn, Sascha & Luhan, Wolfgang J., 2021. "Lying for others: The impact of agency on misreporting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    10. Valerio Capraro, 2018. "Gender differences in lying in sender-receiver games: A meta-analysis," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(4), pages 345-355, July.
    11. Cristina Bicchieri & Eugen Dimant, 2018. "It's Not A Lie If You Believe It. Lying and Belief Distortion Under Norm-Uncertainty," PPE Working Papers 0012, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    12. Fosch-Villaronga, Eduard & Calleja, Carlos José & Drukarch, Hadassah & Torricelli, Diego, 2023. "How can ISO 13482:2014 account for the ethical and social considerations of robotic exoskeletons?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    13. Garbarino, Ellen & Slonim, Robert & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Loss aversion and lying behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 379-393.
    14. Aksoy, Billur & Palma, Marco A., 2019. "The effects of scarcity on cheating and in-group favoritism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 100-117.
    15. Muñoz-Izquierdo, Nora & Gil-Gómez de Liaño, Beatriz & Rin-Sánchez, Francisco Daniel & Pascual-Ezama, David, 2014. "Economists: cheaters with altruistic instincts," MPRA Paper 60678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Evan Polman & Lyn M. Van Swol & Paul R. Hoban, 2020. "Harbingers of foul play: A field study of gain/loss frames and regulatory fit in the NFL," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 353-370, May.
    17. Liu, Xin Lucy & Lu, Jackson G. & Zhang, Hongyu & Cai, Yahua, 2021. "Helping the organization but hurting yourself: How employees’ unethical pro-organizational behavior predicts work-to-life conflict," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 88-100.
    18. Gino, Francesca & Ayal, Shahar & Ariely, Dan, 2013. "Self-serving altruism? The lure of unethical actions that benefit others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 285-292.
    19. Kang, Polly & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2022. "Emotional Deception in Negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Bitterly, T. Bradford & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2019. "The impression management benefits of humorous self-disclosures: How humor influences perceptions of veracity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 73-89.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0216238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.