Cargando…
Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating?
In this preregistered study, we attempted to replicate and substantially extend a frequently cited experiment by Schurr and Ritov, published in 2016, suggesting that winners of pairwise competitions are more likely than others to steal money in subsequent games of chance against different opponents,...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9346351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35950201 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202197 |
_version_ | 1784761631900696576 |
---|---|
author | Colman, Andrew M. Pulford, Briony D. Frosch, Caren A. Mangiarulo, Marta Miles, Jeremy N. V. |
author_facet | Colman, Andrew M. Pulford, Briony D. Frosch, Caren A. Mangiarulo, Marta Miles, Jeremy N. V. |
author_sort | Colman, Andrew M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | In this preregistered study, we attempted to replicate and substantially extend a frequently cited experiment by Schurr and Ritov, published in 2016, suggesting that winners of pairwise competitions are more likely than others to steal money in subsequent games of chance against different opponents, possibly because of an enhanced sense of entitlement among competition winners. A replication seemed desirable because of the relevance of the effect to dishonesty in everyday life, the apparent counterintuitivity of the effect, possible problems and anomalies in the original study, and above all the fact that the researchers investigated only one potential explanation for the effect. Our results failed to replicate Schurr and Ritov's basic finding: we found no evidence to support the hypotheses that either winning or losing is associated with subsequent cheating. A second online study also failed to replicate Schurr and Ritov's basic finding. We used structural equation modelling to test four possible explanations for cheating—sense of entitlement, self-confidence, feeling lucky and inequality aversion. Only inequality aversion turned out to be significantly associated with cheating. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9346351 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | The Royal Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93463512022-08-09 Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? Colman, Andrew M. Pulford, Briony D. Frosch, Caren A. Mangiarulo, Marta Miles, Jeremy N. V. R Soc Open Sci Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience In this preregistered study, we attempted to replicate and substantially extend a frequently cited experiment by Schurr and Ritov, published in 2016, suggesting that winners of pairwise competitions are more likely than others to steal money in subsequent games of chance against different opponents, possibly because of an enhanced sense of entitlement among competition winners. A replication seemed desirable because of the relevance of the effect to dishonesty in everyday life, the apparent counterintuitivity of the effect, possible problems and anomalies in the original study, and above all the fact that the researchers investigated only one potential explanation for the effect. Our results failed to replicate Schurr and Ritov's basic finding: we found no evidence to support the hypotheses that either winning or losing is associated with subsequent cheating. A second online study also failed to replicate Schurr and Ritov's basic finding. We used structural equation modelling to test four possible explanations for cheating—sense of entitlement, self-confidence, feeling lucky and inequality aversion. Only inequality aversion turned out to be significantly associated with cheating. The Royal Society 2022-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9346351/ /pubmed/35950201 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202197 Text en © 2022 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Colman, Andrew M. Pulford, Briony D. Frosch, Caren A. Mangiarulo, Marta Miles, Jeremy N. V. Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title | Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title_full | Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title_fullStr | Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title_full_unstemmed | Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title_short | Does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
title_sort | does competitive winning increase subsequent cheating? |
topic | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9346351/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35950201 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.202197 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT colmanandrewm doescompetitivewinningincreasesubsequentcheating AT pulfordbrionyd doescompetitivewinningincreasesubsequentcheating AT froschcarena doescompetitivewinningincreasesubsequentcheating AT mangiarulomarta doescompetitivewinningincreasesubsequentcheating AT milesjeremynv doescompetitivewinningincreasesubsequentcheating |