衡量标准:金钱暴露、奖励规模和损失厌恶对作弊的影响

Loreta Cannito , Riccardo Palumbo , Pier Luigi Sacco
{"title":"衡量标准:金钱暴露、奖励规模和损失厌恶对作弊的影响","authors":"Loreta Cannito ,&nbsp;Riccardo Palumbo ,&nbsp;Pier Luigi Sacco","doi":"10.1016/j.crbeha.2023.100110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>People sometimes behave dishonestly to collect undeserved monetary rewards. Prior research has shown that people put more effort into avoiding monetary losses than into making gains, and accordingly they cheat more to avoid losses than to acquire the equivalent amount (loss aversion). However, there has been a lack of research about how reward size and money exposure affect levels of cheating. Using a real effort task, we implemented a between-subjects experimental design to test the effects of framing (loss vs gain), reward size (small vs large) and money exposure (money vs no money) on individual real performance and cheating levels. The results revealed no significant differences in real performance. However, for cheating levels, all two-way interaction effects turned out to be significant (i.e., frame by size – frame by exposure – size by exposure). To disentangle the effects of the loss frame on cheating levels, a double moderated model was tested with reward size and money exposure as moderators. The model was significant with conditional effects revealing that the loss frame generally causes increased cheating level unless (i) participants were informed about a possible large reward they had not been exposed to, and (ii) participants were informed about, and exposed to, a small reward. Our results offer a partial replication of the finding that the level of cheating is higher within the loss frame than in the gain framing, which suggests that the relationship between framing and cheating behaviour can be moderated by other variables such as reward size and exposure to a reward. They also pose new questions for future research about complex joint effects on cheating behaviour, such as the combined influence of framing and default choices.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72746,"journal":{"name":"Current research in behavioral sciences","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measure for measure: Effects of money exposure, reward size and loss aversion on cheating\",\"authors\":\"Loreta Cannito ,&nbsp;Riccardo Palumbo ,&nbsp;Pier Luigi Sacco\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.crbeha.2023.100110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>People sometimes behave dishonestly to collect undeserved monetary rewards. Prior research has shown that people put more effort into avoiding monetary losses than into making gains, and accordingly they cheat more to avoid losses than to acquire the equivalent amount (loss aversion). However, there has been a lack of research about how reward size and money exposure affect levels of cheating. Using a real effort task, we implemented a between-subjects experimental design to test the effects of framing (loss vs gain), reward size (small vs large) and money exposure (money vs no money) on individual real performance and cheating levels. The results revealed no significant differences in real performance. However, for cheating levels, all two-way interaction effects turned out to be significant (i.e., frame by size – frame by exposure – size by exposure). To disentangle the effects of the loss frame on cheating levels, a double moderated model was tested with reward size and money exposure as moderators. The model was significant with conditional effects revealing that the loss frame generally causes increased cheating level unless (i) participants were informed about a possible large reward they had not been exposed to, and (ii) participants were informed about, and exposed to, a small reward. Our results offer a partial replication of the finding that the level of cheating is higher within the loss frame than in the gain framing, which suggests that the relationship between framing and cheating behaviour can be moderated by other variables such as reward size and exposure to a reward. They also pose new questions for future research about complex joint effects on cheating behaviour, such as the combined influence of framing and default choices.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current research in behavioral sciences\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100110\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current research in behavioral sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666518223000153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current research in behavioral sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666518223000153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们有时会通过不诚实的行为来获取不应得的金钱奖励。先前的研究表明,人们更努力地避免金钱损失,而不是获得收益,因此,他们更多地欺骗以避免损失,而不是获得等量的损失(损失厌恶)。然而,关于奖励大小和金钱暴露如何影响作弊程度的研究一直缺乏。通过一个真正的努力任务,我们实施了一个被试之间的实验设计来测试框架(损失vs收益)、奖励大小(小vs大)和金钱暴露(有钱vs没钱)对个人真实表现和作弊水平的影响。结果显示,实际表现没有显著差异。然而,对于作弊水平,所有的双向互动效应都是显著的(即,帧按尺寸-帧按曝光-尺寸按曝光)。为了解开损失框架对作弊水平的影响,我们测试了一个双调节模型,其中奖励大小和金钱暴露为调节因子。该模型具有显著的条件效应,揭示了损失框架通常会导致作弊水平的增加,除非(i)参与者被告知他们没有接触到的可能的大奖励,以及(ii)参与者被告知并接触到一个小奖励。我们的研究结果部分重复了先前的发现,即在损失框架中作弊的程度高于在获得框架中作弊的程度,这表明框架和作弊行为之间的关系可以通过其他变量(如奖励大小和获得奖励的程度)来调节。他们也为未来研究欺骗行为的复杂联合效应提出了新的问题,比如框架和默认选择的综合影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Measure for measure: Effects of money exposure, reward size and loss aversion on cheating

People sometimes behave dishonestly to collect undeserved monetary rewards. Prior research has shown that people put more effort into avoiding monetary losses than into making gains, and accordingly they cheat more to avoid losses than to acquire the equivalent amount (loss aversion). However, there has been a lack of research about how reward size and money exposure affect levels of cheating. Using a real effort task, we implemented a between-subjects experimental design to test the effects of framing (loss vs gain), reward size (small vs large) and money exposure (money vs no money) on individual real performance and cheating levels. The results revealed no significant differences in real performance. However, for cheating levels, all two-way interaction effects turned out to be significant (i.e., frame by size – frame by exposure – size by exposure). To disentangle the effects of the loss frame on cheating levels, a double moderated model was tested with reward size and money exposure as moderators. The model was significant with conditional effects revealing that the loss frame generally causes increased cheating level unless (i) participants were informed about a possible large reward they had not been exposed to, and (ii) participants were informed about, and exposed to, a small reward. Our results offer a partial replication of the finding that the level of cheating is higher within the loss frame than in the gain framing, which suggests that the relationship between framing and cheating behaviour can be moderated by other variables such as reward size and exposure to a reward. They also pose new questions for future research about complex joint effects on cheating behaviour, such as the combined influence of framing and default choices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current research in behavioral sciences
Current research in behavioral sciences Behavioral Neuroscience
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
40 days
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents The causal role of numerical and non-numerical order processing abilities in the early development of mathematics skills: Evidence from an intervention study Discrete memories of a continuous world: A working memory perspective on event segmentation Relationships between physical activity and loneliness: A systematic review of intervention studies Do narcissists possess a sense of purpose? Purpose-in-life and narcissism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1