IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/zvsdb_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Honesty of Online Workers: A Field Experiment shows no Evidence of Self-Selection of Cheaters to a Cheating-enabling Work Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Vranka, Marek Albert

    (University of Economics)

  • Hudik, Marek
  • Frollova, Nikola

    (Prague University of Economics and Business)

  • Bahník, Štěpán

    (University of Economics, Prague)

  • Sýkorová, Markéta
  • Houdek, Petr

    (University of Economics in Prague)

Abstract

Does the choice of an environment where cheating is possible lead to its escalation? We analyzed behavior of employees (N = 284) hired to perform a task online. In the manual reporting (MR), employees could overreport the number of hours worked. In the automatic reporting (AR), the hours were counted automatically, making cheating impossible. Two-thirds of the participants were given a chance to choose the reporting scheme, the rest were assigned to the MR directly. As the actual time spent on the task was tracked in all conditions, we were able to assess the degree of overreporting by employees in MR. Although we found that people in MR slightly overreported the hours worked, employees who chose MR did not overreport their hours more than those assigned to MR at random. Moreover, participants lower in honesty-humility were not more likely to choose MR; only those higher in emotionality were. The results show that even when enabled to cheat, online workers reported their hours worked honestly and the possibility for cheaters to select cheating enabling environments may not always lead to an increase of dishonesty in organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Vranka, Marek Albert & Hudik, Marek & Frollova, Nikola & Bahník, Štěpán & Sýkorová, Markéta & Houdek, Petr, 2021. "Honesty of Online Workers: A Field Experiment shows no Evidence of Self-Selection of Cheaters to a Cheating-enabling Work Environment," OSF Preprints zvsdb_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:zvsdb_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/zvsdb_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/60618491763cf501df1b59fb/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/zvsdb_v1?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. Andrew Hertzberg & Jose Maria Liberti & Daniel Paravisini, 2010. "Information and Incentives Inside the Firm: Evidence from Loan Officer Rotation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(3), pages 795-828, June.
    2. Uri Gneezy & Agne Kajackaite & Joel Sobel, 2018. "Lying Aversion and the Size of the Lie," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 419-453, February.
    3. Akın, Zafer, 2019. "Dishonesty, social information, and sorting," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 199-210.
    4. Banerjee, Ritwik & Baul, Tushi & Rosenblat, Tanya, 2015. "On self selection of the corrupt into the public sector," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 43-46.
    5. Nikola Frollová & Marek Vranka & Petr Houdek, 2021. "A qualitative study of perception of a dishonesty experiment," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 274-290, July.
    6. Pfattheicher, Stefan & Schindler, Simon & Nockur, Laila, 2019. "On the impact of Honesty-Humility and a cue of being watched on cheating behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 159-174.
    7. Rema Hanna & Shing-Yi Wang, 2017. "Dishonesty and Selection into Public Service: Evidence from India," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 262-290, August.
    8. Sebastian Barfort & Nikolaj A. Harmon & Frederik Hjorth & Asmus Leth Olsen, 2019. "Sustaining Honesty in Public Service: The Role of Selection," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 96-123, November.
    9. Heck, Daniel W. & Thielmann, Isabel & Moshagen, Morten & Hilbig, Benjamin E., 2018. "Who lies? A large-scale reanalysis linking basic personality traits to unethical decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 356-371, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Vranka, Marek & Hudík, Marek & Frollová, Nikola & Bahník, Štěpán & Sýkorová, Markéta & Houdek, Petr, 2021. "Honesty of online workers: A field experiment shows no evidence of self-selection of cheaters to a cheating-enabling work environment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    2. Petr Houdek & Štěpán Bahník & Marek Hudík & Marek Vranka, 2021. "Selection effects on dishonest behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 238-266, March.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:238-266 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Caliari, Daniele & Soraperra, Ivan, 2023. "Planning to cheat: Temptation and self-control," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2023-205, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    5. Brassiolo, Pablo & Estrada, Ricardo & Fajardo, Gustavo & Vargas, Juan, 2021. "Self-Selection into corruption: Evidence from the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 799-812.
    6. Fries, Tilman, 2024. "Signaling motives in lying games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 338-376.
    7. Lang, Matthias & Schudy, Simeon, 2023. "(Dis)honesty and the value of transparency for campaign promises," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    8. Stoll, Julius, 2022. "The cost of honesty: Field evidence☆," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Mehmood, Sultan & Naseer, Shaheen & Chen, Daniel L., 2024. "Altruism in governance: Insights from randomized training for Pakistan's junior ministers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    10. Basu, Arnab K. & Chau, Nancy H. & Kundu, Anustup & Sen, Kunal, 2025. "Dishonesty Concessions in Teams: Theory and Experimental Insights from Local Politicians in India," IZA Discussion Papers 17628, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Simeon Schudy & Susanna Grundmann & Lisa Spantig, 2024. "Individual Preferences for Truth-Telling," CESifo Working Paper Series 11521, CESifo.
    12. Kai A. Konrad & Tim Lohse & Sven A. Simon, 2021. "Pecunia non olet: on the self-selection into (dis)honest earning opportunities," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1105-1130, December.
    13. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse, 2021. "Malleability of Preferences for Honesty," CESifo Working Paper Series 9033, CESifo.
    14. Alain Cohn & Tobias Gesche & Michel André Maréchal, 2022. "Honesty in the Digital Age," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 827-845, February.
    15. Harris, Donna & Borcan , Oana & Serra, Danila & Telli, Henry & Schettini, Bruno & Dercon, Stefan, 2024. "Proud to Belong: The Impact of Ethics Training on Police Officers in Ghana," CEPR Discussion Papers 19141, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Bauer, Kevin & Kosfeld, Michael & von Siemens, Ferdinand, 2021. "Incentives, Self-Selection, and Coordination of Motivated Agents for the Production of Social Goods," IZA Discussion Papers 14595, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Guillermo Cruces & Martín A. Rossi & Ernesto Schargrodsky, 2023. "Dishonesty and Public Employment," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 5(4), pages 511-526, December.
    18. Jantsje M. Mol & Eline C. M. Heijden & Jan J. M. Potters, 2020. "(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 961-978, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Hübler, Olaf & Koch, Melanie & Menkhoff, Lukas & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2021. "Corruption and cheating: Evidence from rural Thailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    21. 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.

    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:osf:osfxxx:zvsdb_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.