Sun, Oct 18, 2026
| فارسی
Volume 28, Issue 1 (Spring 2026)
Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2026, 28(1): 104-119 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sajadi S M, Soltani M, Yazdani H. Dishonesty under tempting conditions and the impact of honesty priming on self-control. Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2026; 28 (1) :104-119
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-1819-en.html
URL: http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-1819-en.html
1- Master’s Student in Business Administration (Marketing), University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Farabi Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Faculty of Public Administration and Organizational Sciences, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Farabi Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Faculty of Public Administration and Organizational Sciences, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (500 Views)
Introduction: Unethical behavior can have serious consequences ranging from social to economic and cultural aspects. In socio-economic systems, unethical behavior such as corruption or fraud leads to huge economic losses. When ethical and moral principles are not followed in society, social trust is lost, and injustices increase. At the societal level, it also enhances social deviance. Most studies have investigated unethical behavior in general terms, but the combined effect of situational temptation and honesty-related priming on dishonest behavior remains enigmatic.
Methods: The present study investigated the effect of tempting conditions on honesty, as well as the effects of self-control and honesty priming on reducing cheating, using a 2×3 factorial design. A total of 230 university students were randomly divided into 2 honesty-priming conditions and 3 temptation levels. Participants completed a 25-question multiple-choice general knowledge test on a separate answer sheet. By providing a separate answer sheet, the design allowed for self-reporting and cheating. Participants in the priming condition completed a MediaLab test, which required them to choose the synonym (or most familiar word) for the words honesty, integrity, and trustworthiness on a 0-3 scale. Lastly, cheating behavior was operationalized as the difference between self-reported scores and actual performance. All analyses were conducted in SPSS version 27 using factorial ANOVA.
Results: Results revealed a significant effect of tempting conditions on cheating (F(6)=7.747, P<0.05). However, no effect of increased temptation or priming was observed on compulsive reporting (P>0.05). No interaction was found.
Conclusion: This study suggest that individuals may cheat more often if the probability of the dishonest act being detected is lower. This type of behavior is not apparently uncontrolled because it stays within a certain (bounded) range. In addition, findings revealed that honesty priming before exposure to temptation alone has no impact on increasing self-control or reducing dishonest behavior.
Methods: The present study investigated the effect of tempting conditions on honesty, as well as the effects of self-control and honesty priming on reducing cheating, using a 2×3 factorial design. A total of 230 university students were randomly divided into 2 honesty-priming conditions and 3 temptation levels. Participants completed a 25-question multiple-choice general knowledge test on a separate answer sheet. By providing a separate answer sheet, the design allowed for self-reporting and cheating. Participants in the priming condition completed a MediaLab test, which required them to choose the synonym (or most familiar word) for the words honesty, integrity, and trustworthiness on a 0-3 scale. Lastly, cheating behavior was operationalized as the difference between self-reported scores and actual performance. All analyses were conducted in SPSS version 27 using factorial ANOVA.
Results: Results revealed a significant effect of tempting conditions on cheating (F(6)=7.747, P<0.05). However, no effect of increased temptation or priming was observed on compulsive reporting (P>0.05). No interaction was found.
Conclusion: This study suggest that individuals may cheat more often if the probability of the dishonest act being detected is lower. This type of behavior is not apparently uncontrolled because it stays within a certain (bounded) range. In addition, findings revealed that honesty priming before exposure to temptation alone has no impact on increasing self-control or reducing dishonest behavior.
Type of Study: Research |
Received: 2025/09/4 | Accepted: 2026/08/25 | Published: 2026/09/6
Received: 2025/09/4 | Accepted: 2026/08/25 | Published: 2026/09/6
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
