Citation

Van der Cruyssen I, D'hondt J, Meijer E, Verschuere B. Psychol. Sci. 2020; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Affiliation

Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Association for Psychological Science, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1177/0956797620903716

PMID

32156182

Abstract

Shalvi, Eldar, and Bereby-Meyer (2012) found across two studies (N = 72 for each) that time pressure increased cheating. These findings suggest that dishonesty comes naturally, whereas honesty requires overcoming the initial tendency to cheat. Although the study's results were statistically significant, a Bayesian reanalysis indicates that they had low evidential strength. In a direct replication attempt of Shalvi et al.'s Experiment 2, we found that time pressure did not increase cheating, N = 428, point biserial correlation (r_pb) =.05, Bayes factor (BF)₀₁ = 16.06. One important deviation from the original procedure, however, was the use of mass testing. In a second direct replication with small groups of participants, we found that time pressure also did not increase cheating, N = 297, r_pb =.03, BF₀₁ = 9.59. These findings indicate that the original study may have overestimated the true effect of time pressure on cheating and the generality of the effect beyond the original context.

Language: en

Keywords

cheating; honesty; intuition; lying; moral decision making; open data; open materials; preregistered; replication; time pressure