# 644 | ResearchBox

ResearchBox # 644 - 'Does Hoodwinking Others Pay?'


Bingo Table
  Show file names
  Show file IDs
  Show timestamps
Study 1


  Study 1 - AsPredicted 71354.pdf



  Study 1 - Qualtrics survey.pdf



  Study 1.qsf


  


  Study 1.xlsx


  Study 1 Code.sps


Study 2


  Study 2 - AsPredicted 75233.pdf



  Study 2 - Qualtrics survey for Main Study.pdf



  Study 2 - Qualtrics survey for Personality Assessment.pdf



  Study 2 - Main survey.qsf



  Study 2 - Personality Assessment survey.qsf


  


  Study 2.xlsx


  Study 2 Code.sps



  Study 2.do


Study 3A


  Study 3A - Printed questionnaire.pdf


  


  Study 3A Data.xlsx


  Study 3A Code.do


Study 3B


  Study 3B - AsPredicted 26078.pdf



  Study 3B - Qualtrics survey.pdf



  Study 3B.qsf


  


  Study 3B.xlsx


  Study 3B Code.sps


Study S1


  Study S1 - Qualtrics survey.pdf



  Study S1.qsf


  


  Study S1.xlsx


  Study S1.sps


Study S2


  Study S2 - Qualtrics survey.pdf



  Study S2.qsf


  


  Study S2.xlsx


  Study S2.sps


Study S3


  Study S3 - Qualtrics survey.pdf



  Study S3.qsf


  


  Study S3.xlsx


  Study S3.sps


Previewing files
Files can be previewed by clicking on descriptions.
Codebooks can be previewed by clicking on


  

Tell us if something is wrong with this Box



BOX INFORMATION

SUPPLEMENTARY FILES FOR
Van Zant AB, Kennedy JA, Kray LJ. (2022) 'Does hoodwinking others pay? The psychological and relational consequences of undetected negotiator deception'. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. .
doi: 10.1037/pspi0000410

LICENSE FOR USE
All content posted to ResearchBox is under a CC By 4.0 License (all use is allowed as long as authorship of the content is attributed). When using content from ResearchBox please cite the original work, and provide a link to the URL for this box (https://researchbox.org/644).

BOX PUBLIC SINCE
August 27, 2022   (files may not be changed, deleted, or added)

BOX CREATORS
Alex Van Zant (alex.vanzant@rutgers.edu)
Jessica Kennedy (jessica.kennedy@vanderbilt.edu)
Laura Kray (ljkray@berkeley.edu)

ABSTRACT
Lies often go undetected, and we know little about the psychological and relational consequences of successfully deceiving others. While the evidence to date indicates that undetected dishonesty induces positive affect in independent decision contexts, we propose that it may elicit guilt and undermine satisfaction in negotiations despite facilitating better deals for deceivers. Across four studies, we find support for a deceiver’s guilt account, whereby dishonesty triggers guilt and lessens negotiators’ satisfaction with the bargaining experience. This pattern is robust to several factors, including the size of negotiators’ incentives and individual differences in negotiators’ moral character. It holds for both lies issued of negotiators’ own volition and in compliance with others’ orders. Large incentives also exacerbated dishonesty-induced guilt. Further, dissatisfaction stemming from dishonesty-induced guilt had downstream relational consequences. Despite going undetected, dishonesty in a focal negotiation reduced deceivers’ likelihood of choosing to interact again with the same counterpart and adversely impacted their subjective value in future negotiations with that counterpart.