The proposed experiment will examine the effect of deceptive behavior on memory. Participants will be assigned to a “strong-incentive to cheat” or “weak-incentive to cheat” condition and play the adapted Sequential Dyadic Die-Rolling paradigm. Specifically, Player A (computer; participants think it is another participant) throws a die and reports it to Player B (participant). Then Player B throws his/her die, remembers the outcome, and reports it to Player A. Participants in the “strong-incentive to cheat” condition are monetarily punished if their die roll outcome differs from Player A's die roll outcome. Participants in the “weak-incentive to cheat” condition are not punished if the die roll outcomes differ. Two-days later, memory for the die-rolling event will be assessed. We predict that participants in the “strong-incentive to cheat” condition will have lower belief and recollection for the die-rolling event and will report more errors than participants in the “weak-incentive to cheat” condition.

Registered report: The effects of incentivized lies on memory

Mangiulli I.
2021-01-01

Abstract

The proposed experiment will examine the effect of deceptive behavior on memory. Participants will be assigned to a “strong-incentive to cheat” or “weak-incentive to cheat” condition and play the adapted Sequential Dyadic Die-Rolling paradigm. Specifically, Player A (computer; participants think it is another participant) throws a die and reports it to Player B (participant). Then Player B throws his/her die, remembers the outcome, and reports it to Player A. Participants in the “strong-incentive to cheat” condition are monetarily punished if their die roll outcome differs from Player A's die roll outcome. Participants in the “weak-incentive to cheat” condition are not punished if the die roll outcomes differ. Two-days later, memory for the die-rolling event will be assessed. We predict that participants in the “strong-incentive to cheat” condition will have lower belief and recollection for the die-rolling event and will report more errors than participants in the “weak-incentive to cheat” condition.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Riesthuis, Otgaar, Hope, & Mangiulli, 2021 (stage 1).pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Riesthuis, Otgaar, Hope, & Mangiulli, 2021 (stage 1)
Tipologia: Documento in Versione Editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 807.99 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
807.99 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11586/414803
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact