RECORD
Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences?
Physics and Society · Submitted 12 Jun 2015
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
The opportunity to tell a white lie (i.e., a lie that benefits another person) generates a moral conflict between two opposite moral dictates, one pushing towards telling always the truth and the other pushing towards helping others. Here we study how people resolve this moral conflict. What does telling a white lie signal about a person's pro-social tendencies? To answer this question, we conducted a two-stage 2x2 experiment. In the first stage, we used a Deception Game to measure aversion to telling a Pareto white lie (i.e., a lie that helps both the liar and the listener), and aversion to telling an altruistic white lie (i.e., a lie that helps the listener at the expense of the liar). In the second stage we measured altruistic tendencies using a Dictator Game and cooperative tendencies using a Prisoner's dilemma. We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie. Our results shed light on the moral conflit between pro-sociality and truth-telling. In particular, the first finding suggests that a significant proportion of people have non-distributional notions of what the right thing to do is: irrespective of their economic consequences, they tell the truth, they cooperate, they share their money.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | The opportunity to tell a white lie (i.e., a lie that benefits another person) generates a moral conflict between two opposite moral dictates, one pushing towards telling always the truth and the other pushing towards helping others. | background 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | Here we study how people resolve this moral conflict. | contribution 0.93 | 0.64 | 0.02 | unclear 0.51 |
| s2 | What does telling a white lie signal about a person's pro-social tendencies? | gap 0.68 | 0.04 | 0.02 | unclear 0.99 |
| s3 | To answer this question, we conducted a two-stage 2x2 experiment. | method 0.94 | 0.94 | 0.01 | asserted 0.95 |
| s4 | In the first stage, we used a Deception Game to measure aversion to telling a Pareto white lie (i.e., a lie that helps both the liar and the listener), and aversion to telling an altruistic white lie (i.e., a lie that helps the listener at the expense of the liar). | method 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | In the second stage we measured altruistic tendencies using a Dictator Game and cooperative tendencies using a Prisoner's dilemma. | method 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.02 | asserted 1.00 |
| s6 | We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie. | result 1.00 | 0.98 | 0.82 | asserted 1.00 |
| s7 | Our results shed light on the moral conflit between pro-sociality and truth-telling. | interpretation 0.99 | 0.69 | 0.13 | asserted 0.95 |
| s8 | In particular, the first finding suggests that a significant proportion of people have non-distributional notions of what the right thing to do is: irrespective of their economic consequences, they tell the truth, they cooperate, they share their money. | interpretation 1.00 | 0.82 | 0.26 | hedged possibility 0.92 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
The opportunity to tell a white lie (i.e., a lie that benefits another person) generates a moral conflict between two opposite moral dictates, one pushing towards telling always the truth and the other pushing towards helping others. Here we study how people resolve this moral conflict. What does telling a white lie signal about a person's pro-social tendencies? To answer this question, we conducted a two-stage 2x2 experiment. In the first stage, we used a Deception Game to measure aversion to telling a Pareto white lie (i.e., a lie that helps both the liar and the listener), and aversion to telling an altruistic white lie (i.e., a lie that helps the listener at the expense of the liar). In the second stage we measured altruistic tendencies using a Dictator Game and cooperative tendencies using a Prisoner's dilemma. We found three major results: (i) both altruism and cooperation are positively correlated with aversion to telling a Pareto white lie; (ii) both altruism and cooperation are negatively correlated with aversion to telling an altruistic white lie; (iii) men are more likely than women to tell an altruistic white lie, but not to tell a Pareto white lie. Our results shed light on the moral conflit between pro-sociality and truth-telling. In particular, the first finding suggests that a significant proportion of people have non-distributional notions of what the right thing to do is: irrespective of their economic consequences, they tell the truth, they cooperate, they share their money.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.