Hiding Personal Information Reveals the Worst

Leslie K. John; Kate  Barasz; Michael I. Norton

Article | Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | January 26, 2016

Hiding Personal Information Reveals the Worst

by Leslie K. John, Kate Barasz and Michael I. Norton

Abstract

Seven experiments explore people's decisions to share or withhold personal information and the wisdom of such decisions. When people choose not to reveal information—to be "hiders"—they are judged negatively by others (experiment 1). These negative judgments emerge when hiding is volitional (experiments 2A and 2B) and are driven by decreases in trustworthiness engendered by decisions to hide (experiments 3A and 3B). Moreover, hiders do not intuit these negative consequences: given the choice to withhold or reveal unsavory information, people often choose to withhold, but observers rate those who reveal even questionable behavior more positively (experiments 4A and 4B). The negative impact of hiding holds whether opting not to disclose unflattering (drug use, poor grades, and sexually transmitted diseases) or flattering (blood donations) information including across decisions ranging from whom to date to whom to hire. When faced with decisions about disclosure, decision makers should be aware not just of the risk of revealing but of what hiding reveals.

Keywords: disclosure; transparency; trust; policy-making; privacy; Information; Corporate Disclosure; Decision Choices and Conditions; Trust;

Format: Print

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

John, Leslie K., Kate Barasz, and Michael I. Norton. "Hiding Personal Information Reveals the Worst." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 113, no. 4 (January 26, 2016): 954–959.

How do the very wealthy spend their time, and how does time use relate to well-being? In two studies in the Netherlands, the affluent (N=863, N=690) and the general population (N=1232, N=306) spent time in surprisingly similar ways, such as by spending the same amount of time working. Yet, the nature of their time-use differed in critical ways that are related to life satisfaction. In Study 1, millionaires spent more time engaged in active leisure (e.g., exercising and volunteering) rather than passive leisure (e.g., watching television and relaxing). In Study 2, millionaires spent more time engaged in tasks at work over which they had more control. The affluent sample belongs to the top of the income and wealth distribution, representing a significantly wealthier sample than in previous studies. These results further our understanding of when and how wealth may translate into greater well-being.

The 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act intensified debates over the role of government in the distribution of healthcare. A nationally-representative sample of Americans reported their estimated and ideal distributions of healthcare (unmet need for prescription medications) and death (gains in life expectancy). Respondents across the demographic and political spectrum wanted mortality and healthcare to be distributed more evenly among the rich and poor than they estimated them to be. For example, respondents estimated that Americans in the poorest quintile lived 1.5 months longer over the previous 20 years while those in the richest quintile lived 4.7 months longer, but reported ideal figures of 2.5 and 3.6 months – both were far more equal than the actual figures: -1.8 and 7.2 months. Despite heated debates about healthcare, Americans share a consensus belief that current disparities in death and healthcare are far from their ideals.

Faculty & Research

Hiding Personal Information Reveals the Worst

Abstract

Citation:

About the Authors

More from these Authors