Cheating More for Less: Upward Social Comparisons Motivate the Poorly Compensated to Cheat

Leslie K. John; George   Loewenstein; Scott  Rick

Article | Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes | March 2014

Cheating More for Less: Upward Social Comparisons Motivate the Poorly Compensated to Cheat

by Leslie K. John, George Loewenstein and Scott Rick

Abstract

Intuitively, people should cheat more when cheating is more lucrative, but we find that the effect of performance-based pay rates on dishonesty depends on how readily people can compare their pay rate to that of others. In Experiment 1, participants were paid 5 cents or 25 cents per self-reported point in a trivia task, and half were aware that they could have received the alternative pay rate. Lower pay rates increased cheating when the prospect of a higher pay rate was salient. Experiment 2 illustrates that this effect is driven by the ease with which poorly compensated participants can compare their pay to that of others who earn a higher pay rate. Our results suggest that low pay rates are, in and of themselves, unlikely to promote dishonesty. Instead, it is the salience of upward social comparisons that encourages the poorly compensated to cheat.

Keywords: dishonesty; decision making; social comparison; fairness; pay secrecy; Motivation and Incentives; Fairness; Decision Making; Compensation and Benefits;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

John, Leslie K., George Loewenstein, and Scott Rick. "Cheating More for Less: Upward Social Comparisons Motivate the Poorly Compensated to Cheat." Special Issue on Behavioral Ethics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 123, no. 2 (March 2014): 101–109.

Email mking@hbs.edu for a courtesy copy.

The case describes a program that CVS Health recently implemented to improve medication adherence, an important problem from a societal, public policy, and firm perspective. A test of the program, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to implement, increased the proportion of adherent customers by 1.4 percentage points. Students are asked to quantify the system-wide economic benefit of this improvement and draw upon insights from behavioral science to examine approaches for boosting medication adherence.

Email mking@hbs.edu for a courtesy copy.

By the time Dan Doctoroff, CEO of Sidewalk Labs, began hosting a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” session in January 2018, he had only nine months remaining to convince the people of Toronto, their government representatives, and presumably his parent company Alphabet, Inc., that Sidewalk Labs’ plan to construct “the first truly 21st-century city” on the Canadian city’s waterfront was a sound one. Along with much excitement and optimism, strains of concern had emerged since Doctoroff and partners first announced their intentions for a city “built from the internet up” in Toronto’s Quayside district. As Doctoroff prepared for yet another milestone in a year of planning and community engagement, it was almost certain that of the many questions headed his way, digital privacy would be among them.

In their commentary, Wilson & Stolarz-Fantino argue that specific design features of our research mean that it cannot have policy implications and that researchers “need to consider profit maximization in menu design or studies are likely to suggest ill-informed implementations.” In this reply, we respond to the specific critiques of our work with empirical data and conceptual arguments. We agree with Wilson and Stolarz-Fantino that researchers seeking to understand a policy’s influence on consumers should test predictions about which strategies firms will likely use when implementing a policy. Research, however, that demonstrates the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of an intervention even without perfectly predicting a firm’s response still has enormous value for setting policy.

Faculty & Research

Cheating More for Less: Upward Social Comparisons Motivate the Poorly Compensated to Cheat

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author