Why do people tell the truth? Experimental evidence for pure lie aversion

A recent experimental literature shows that truth-telling is not always motivated by pecuniary motives, and several alternative motivations have been proposed. However, their relative importance in any given context is still not totally clear. This paper investigates the relevance of pure lie aversion, that is, a dislike for lies independent of their consequences. We propose a very simple design where other motives considered in the literature predict zero truth-telling, whereas pure lie aversion predicts a non-zero rate. Thus we interpret the finding that more than a third of the subjects tell the truth as evidence for pure lie aversion. Our design also prevents confounds with another motivation (a desire to act as others expect us to act) not frequently considered but consistent with much existing evidence. We also observe that subjects who tell the truth are more likely to believe that others will tell the truth as well.     

Lying,Integrity, and Cooperation

While talk is cheap to some, it is expensive to others for whom moral considerations come into play. We employ a simple two-stage modified prisoner's dilemma game where integrity is endowed on a continuum to analyze when agents will lie in random economic interactions. If there is sufficient integrity in the population, all agents make a promise in the first stage to cooperate in the second. Some agents always lie, some always tell the truth, and some behave conditionally. Enhanced cooperation is a byproduct of integrity. In a second random interaction without the possibility of exit, some agents “switch” their behavior, that is, some who lied in the first period now tell the truth in the second (they've “reformed”), and some who told the truth in the first period now lie in the second (they've become “cynical”).     

Perturbed communication games with honest senders and naive receivers

This paper studies communication games in which the sender is possibly honest (tells the truth) and the receiver is possibly naive (follows messages as if truthful). The characterization of message-monotone equilibria in the perturbed games explain several important aspects of strategic communication including sender exaggeration, receiver skepticism and message clustering. Surprisingly, the strategic receiver may respond to more aggressive claims with more moderate actions. In the limit as the probabilities of the non-strategic players approach zero, (i) the limit equilibrium corresponds to a most-informative equilibrium of the limit (Crawford-Sobel) game; (ii) only the top messages are sent.     

Credible communication in dynastic government

This paper studies information disclosure in a model of dynastic government. When information about past policy choices comes exclusively from the reports of previous administrations, each administration has an incentive to choose its (suboptimal) one-shot expenditure policy, and then misrepresent its choice to its successor. Consequently, it has been suggested that “horizontal accountability,” i.e., a system of governance where auditing functions lie outside the executive branch, can ensure credible disclosure of a government's activities. This paper suggests a cautious approach to that view.The baseline model examines the reporting incentives of an external auditor who can independently verify the information each period. Even with auditing, credible disclosure is shown to be problematic. Various extensions to this baseline model are examined. In one extension, “liberal” (i.e., those prefering larger government expenditures) and “conservative” (those prefering smaller expenditures) regimes and auditors evolve over time. It is shown that “conservative” (“liberal”) auditors are not credible when the current regime is also “conservative” (“liberal”). Moreover, because information transmission stops when the auditor's and the regime's biases coincide, effective deterrents even in the “good” periods (when the auditor's and the administration's biases differ) are difficult to construct. In all periods the equilibrium requirement of auditor neutrality constrains the dynamic incentives for efficient policy choices. These constraints are shown to bind away from optimal policies in standard constructions of equilibrium. Various ways in which auditing protocols can overcome these problems are discussed.     

Reputational cheap talk with misunderstanding

We consider a cheap talk game with a sender who has a reputational concern for an ability to predict a state of the world correctly, and where receivers may misunderstand the message sent. When communication between the sender and each receiver is private, we identify an equilibrium in which the sender only discloses the least noisy information. Hence, what determines the amount of information revealed is not the absolute noise level of communication, but the extent to which the noise level may vary. The resulting threshold in transmission noise for which information is revealed may differ across receivers, but is unrelated to the quality of the information channel. When information transmission has to be public, a race to the bottom results: the cut-off level for noise of transmitted information now drops to the lowest cut-off level for any receiver in the audience.     

Comments on “Testing for nonlinear structure and chaos in economic time series”

This short paper is a comment on “Univariate tests for nonlinear structure” by Catherine Kyrtsou and Apostolos Serletis. We summarize their main results and discuss some of their conclusions concerning the role of outliers and noisy chaos. In particular, we include some new simulations to investigate whether economic time series may be characterized by low-dimensional noisy chaos.     

Endogenous order and information aggregation

Privately informed experts with heterogeneous expertise decide when to give advice and what advice to give. Each expert’s utility depends upon that expert’s own message as well as those of the other experts. Under different forms of payoff externalities, we find varying results for the optimal order in which messages are sent and the existence of herd behavior. Under negative payoff externalities, all experts send a message together without any delay and a herd never arises. This leads to truthful revealing of all private information. Without forcing any order of speech, we obtain a result similar to the ‘anti-seniority rule’. This, however, goes in the opposite direction when positive payoff externalities are induced. An incentive structure with positive payoff externalities gives rise to a herd led by the most precise expert with a delay in the disclosure of information. Next, we test for the nature of payoff externalities in the remuneration of forecasters listed with I/B/E/S. We find that the underlying payoff externalities are negative, i.e. the benefit from making dissimilar forecasts is higher than that from making similar ones.     

The analysis of expert judgment

Expert judgment is a necessary component of technology assessment. But current methods for attempting to integrate expert judgment with social value judgments in the formation of public policy are inappropriate and ineffective. This article advocates the scientific analysis of experts' judgments. Such analysis produces quantitative, pictorial models of expert judgment, thereby providing an explicit and retraceable procedure for a) documenting and comparing reasons for differences in expert judgment, b) helping experts to resolve such differences, and c) conveying information to decision makers in a clear and useful fashion. The proposed approach provides an alternative to the ineffective method of public hearings and recently proposed adversarial approaches such as the “science court.” Two studies are described to illustrate this approach.     

Assimilation of aggregated inputs into Delphi forecasts: A regression analysis

To examine the manner in which the individual assessments of a panel of delphi experts are combined into a delphi forecast, the supporting reasons they gave for their forecasts of 40 computer applications were coded into categories of assessed “technical feasibility,” “cost of initiating,” and “benefits or needs provided.” Even though different sets of experts provided these statements in support of their individual forecasts, with some experts emphasizing one aspect and others another, it was found that the median forecast of the entire panel was significantly related to the average proportion of reasons in each category which favored bringing about the development. That is, the delphi forecasts of computer applications suggest that the computer application is forecasted to occur sooner to the extent it was judged to be technically feasible, beneficial to users or society, and not costly to develop. The results indicate further that delphi forecasting among a group of experts has logical validity, and that individual contributions are integrated into a group outcome.     

On the informational efficiency of the competitive resource allocation process

The purpose of this paper is to formalize the competitive process as a parametric process, and then prove the minimality of its message space among the message spaces for a broad class of parametric processes that includes the class of processes considered by Hurwicz (in “Studies in Resource Allocation Processes” (K. J. Arrow and L. Hurwicz, Eds.), pp. 413–423, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1977), Mount and Reiter (J. Econ. Theory6 (1974), 161–192), and Osana (J. Econ. Theory17 (1978), 66–78). The proof of this result turns crucially on the “asymmetry property” (which is stronger than the well-known “uniqueness property” of Hurwicz) and on an injectiveness lemma which is applicable to parametric processes.     

Why the person sitting next to you hates limits to growth

Proponents of limits to growth continue to meet with widespread public resistance to the concept, a resistance that in part lies beneath or beyond the practical economic and political objections. In order to establish a “sustainable dialogue” the broad historical and psychological sources of public antipathy need to be understood. One such source may be found in our long-standing cultural adherence to belief in a providential world order and such of its diverse developments as laissez faire capitalism and Marxism. These have in common the peculiarly reassuring assumption that the major ordering forces of human social destiny lie beyond particular human calculation or design. The irrational threat that a planned sustainable society poses for most of Western humanity lies in the implication that the time has come for us to take full responsibility for our future, that we can no longer remain the children of a cosmic process or the secure beneficiaries of economic or social laws. The seriousness and depth of this intuitive antipathy to limits may be examined in several of our imagined futures, particularly the steady-state dystopias of Zamyatin, Huxley, and Orwell. These shrewd, satiric political and psychological prophecies provide clues that proponents of the sustainable society can use in developing a more balanced and effective advocacy. Additional suggestions for this follow.     

Adam Smith's Entwurf eines politokonomischen systems

There are two core elements in Smith's draft of a politico-economic system, an individual-social orientated and a society-state orientated one. Economic actions and institutions have to bring both centres together so as to perform their main functions. Coming to self-autonomy, liberty and justice would be final goals of the Smithian “system of natural liberty”, for which Smith is famous. But he did not simply trust in self-fulfilling Natural Law. The “system of natural liberty” means a faculty, by which the society could develop, if the individual initiated actions might play their leading roles due to an ethical consensus in society, and if the state would be quite aware of his ordo-political task as a constructive matter. Smith gives no recipes. The generations have to find those for themselves. Thus, Smith cannot be called a determinist, but rather an evolutionist.The most exiting results can be found in a fundamental search for Smith as a master of politico-economical methods. The learned prejudice that the “grand classic” was somewhat eclectic and contradictious is to be forgotton. The master's “faults” might be analyzed as a genuine heterogeneous ones, essential for a realistic and pragmatic political economy. This would provide an urgent and modern message.     

Passing the Buck On the acceptance of responsibility

In the Passing the Buck game, the n members of a group decide in a given order whether or not to incur costs so that they can fix a certain problem for the benefit of the group. Passing the Buck means that one relies on the service of a successor. The decision is influenced by social preferences and by strategic considerations. We derive three main conclusions from experiments with n=3 and n=4. (i) The unique perfect Baysian equilibrium of the Passing the Buck game with incomplete information about the preferences of other players generally fits the data, however with two interesting exceptions. (ii) Backward induction breaks down if it requires more than two steps, i.e., for the first player in the game with n=4. (iii) Making one of the members of the group an “expert” who alone is competent to fix the problem is connected with a change of social preferences.     

Enjoy the silence: an experiment on truth-telling

We analyze experimentally two sender–receiver games with conflictive preferences. In the first game, the sender can choose to tell the truth, to lie, or to remain silent. The latter strategy is costly. In the second game, the receiver must decide additionally whether or not to costly punish the sender after having observed the history of the game. We investigate the existence of two kinds of social preferences: lying aversion and preference for truth-telling. In the first game, senders tell the truth more often than predicted by the sequential equilibrium analysis, they remain silent frequently, and there exists a positive correlation between the probability of being truthful and the probability of remaining silent. Our main experimental result for the extended game shows that those subjects who punish the sender with a high probability after being deceived are precisely those who send fewer but more truthful messages. Finally, we solve for the Perfect Bayesian Nash Equilibria of a reduced form of the baseline game with two types of senders. The equilibrium predictions obtained suggest that the observed excessive truth-telling in the baseline game can be explained by lying aversion but not by a preference for truth-telling.

---

Electronic Supplementary Material  The online version of this article () contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Financial support through the Ramón y Cajal program of the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science is gratefully acknowledged. This work was initiated while the author was working at Maastricht University.     

More than words: the effects of cheap talk in a volunteer’s dilemma

We theoretically and experimentally investigate a game in which exactly one person should make a costly effort to achieve a socially efficient outcome. This setting is commonly known as the volunteer’s dilemma. We implement one-way communication by allowing one player to send a message indicating whether she intends to volunteer and investigate the message’s effects on behavior and efficiency in the subsequent game. We theoretically demonstrate that there are asymmetric mixed-strategy equilibria in the volunteer’s dilemma and argue that one of these is likely to emerge through one-way communication. The experimental data support this notion. We find that the actions of both the sender and receiver of the message are crucially affected by the cheap talk stage and that efficiency in the volunteer’s dilemma increases with one-way communication.     

What makes green persuasion effective? Evidence from a community-financed sanitation program in Indonesia

Understanding when and where face-to-face communication affects pro-environmental decisions is important for policymakers. We study a data set collected in a solicitation project intended to increase participation in a community-financed waste collection program in Indonesia. Two types of messages are developed and randomly assigned to 748 households. In addition, solicitors are randomly assigned to a control group or one of two treatment groups, and these groups are shuffled further midway through the project. These two orthogonal randomizations allow us to assess the impact of a combination of messages, solicitors and households. We find that the “help the children” message increases the probability of participation for households with a young child. Solicitor personality is associated with immediate participation but becomes nonsignificant after three months. Furthermore, a household is more likely to participate if a solicitor knows the respondent personally. These results suggest that, at least in the short term, important factors in encouraging behavioral changes include not only the contents of messages but also the type of sender of such messages. This paper highlights the possible impact of targeting and content-sender-receiver matching when persuasive communication is used as an environmental policy instrument.     

Promises and lies: can observers detect deception in written messages

We design a laboratory experiment to examine predictions of trustworthiness in a novel three-person trust game. We investigate whether and why observers of the game can predict the trustworthiness of hand-written communications. Observers report their perception of the trustworthiness of messages, and make predictions about the senders’ behavior. Using observers’ decisions, we are able to classify messages as “promises” or “empty talk.” Drawing from substantial previous research, we hypothesize that certain factors influence whether a sender is likely to honor a message and/or whether an observer perceives the message as likely to behonored: the mention of money; the use of encompassing words; and message length. We find that observers have more trust in longer messages and “promises”; promises that mention money are significantly more likely to be broken; and observers trust equally in promises that do and do not mention money. Overall, observers perform slightly better than chance at predicting whether a message will be honored. We attribute this result to observers’ ability to distinguish promises from empty talk, and to trust promises more than empty talk. However, within each of these two categories, observers are unable to discern between messages that senders will honor from those that they will not.     

SEQUENTIAL EXPERT ADVICE: SUPERIORITY OF CLOSED‐DOOR MEETINGS

Two career‐concerned experts sequentially give advice to a Bayesian decision maker (D). We find that secrecy dominates transparency, yielding superior decisions for D. Secrecy empowers the expert moving late to be pivotal more often. Further, (i) only secrecy enables the second expert to partially communicate her information and its high precision to D and swing the decision away from first expert's recommendation; (ii) if experts have high average precision, then the second expert is effective only under secrecy. These results are obtained when experts only recommend decisions. If they also report the quality of advice, fully revealing equilibrium may exist.     

Fuzzy revealed preference theory

Rationality has traditionally been defined as choice behaviour which can be explained in terms of some implicit binary preference. The point of departure of this paper lies in permitting the binary preference relation to be “fuzzy.” Concepts from fuzzy set theory are used to formalise different notions of rationality, including degrees of rationality. The relation between these and traditional concepts is formally explored. In welfare economics, quasi-orderings have often been used to capture the inherent imprecisions of human value judgements. It is argued here that, in many situations, a more appropriate tool for this may be fuzzy orderings.     

How does the effect of pre-play suggestions vary with group size? Experimental evidence from a threshold public-good game

Numerous studies have examined factors influencing the likelihood of cooperative outcomes in nonzero-sum games, but there has been little study of the interaction between two of the most important: group size and pre-play cheap talk. We report results from an experiment in which groups of size between 2 and 15 play a one-shot multi-player threshold public-good game. In our random leader treatment, all group members select a suggestion (e.g., “Everyone should choose X”), with one randomly chosen to be broadcast to the group. In a choice only treatment, subjects choose suggestions but none is sent, and in a baseline treatment, there are no suggestions at all. We find a negative interaction between group size and this kind of communication: the beneficial effect of both suggestions overall and cooperative suggestions on cooperation, cooperative outcomes, and payoffs decreases sharply as the group size increases. We find a similar negative interaction in a follow-up treatment in which all group members’ suggestions are broadcast to the group. Our results suggest that care should be taken in generalising conclusions from small-group experiments to large groups.