Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Epiphenom

Home
About

Home
Nonreligious
Non-religious jews are more likely to tell self-serving ‘white lies’ than religious jews

Non-religious jews are more likely to tell self-serving ‘white lies’ than religious jews

Last updated on: November 14, 2014 at 10:11 pm by Epiphenom

Non-religious jews are more likely to tell self-serving ‘white lies’ than religious jews 2014-11-14T22:11:52+01:00 Epiphenom

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

What would you do if fate had been a little unkind to you, but you get the chance to make it up for yourself with a small lie?

Take, for example, the experimental setup that Shaul Shalvi and David Leiser, both at Ben Gurion University of the Negev used on two groups of Israeli students. One group was from a secular campus, the other from a ‘religious’ one – meaning that they were orthodox jews.

They asked them to roll a die by shaking it in a cup and then upending it. There was a small hole in the top of the cup, so the students – and no-one else – could see the results of the roll. They were told that they would get paid an amount proportional to the die roll. So if they rolled a 1, they would get 3 Shekels (about 75 US cents), but if they rolled a 6 they would get 18 shekels.

Then they rolled the die again – just to check that it wasn’t loaded. And once again, only they could see the results.

So, what happened? Did everyone faithfully report the number they got with the first die roll? Or did some people, dissatisfied with their luck the first time round, feel they deserved something better? Maybe they reported the second roll instead?

Well, this was a genuinely anonymous experiment, so Shalvi and Leiser couldn’t tell if any particular individual lied. But they could look at the statistics.

As you can see in the figure, the religious students reported rolling the same number of low (1-3) and high (4-6) numbers. In other words, what they reported was exactly what you would expect from chance.

The secular students, however, were much more likely to report rolling a 4-6. Some of them must be lying!

To understand why some secular students felt it was OK to lie, a week later Shalvi and Leiser asked some of the students to evaluate some examples of other people playing the die-rolling game.

These included examples in which the player was honest, examples in which the player was ‘justifiably’ dishonest (for example, they rolled a low number the first time, but honestly reported the higher number they got from the second roll), and ‘unjustifiably’ dishonest (in which the number to player reported was entirely fictional).

They found that religious students judged both kinds of lying more harshly than the secular students. But, more interestingly, while religious students were almost equally harsh in their judgement of justifiable and unjustifiable lies, or secular students there was a big difference between the two.

Secular students thought the the ‘justifiable’ lying really was justifiable! Religious students disagreed.

What this suggests is that secular student’s views of what is dishonest or not depends on the circumstances. If someone is feeling hard done by, it’s OK to tell a little lie to restore the balance. For religious students, lying is lying and that’s it.

Now, put this together with other research showing that religion and authoritarianism act together to stop people telling ‘white’ lies, and the previous post about research showing that religious people stick to the rules regardless of the consequences, and a picture begins to emerge.

Lying and trust go hand in hand. If everyone strictly follows the rules, then you know where you are. But if people are willing to bend the rules in their own interests, then communal life become much more tricky.

It seems to me that, while at first sight the rigid approach to moral rules seems harsh and possibly dangerous, it is probably essential for close communities. When you absolutely depend on your neighbours, you’d better be sure you know how they are going to behave!

So although it might seem crazy that religious people rely more on rules than on consequences when determining what is right and wrong, it might well be a sensible strategy when the circumstances are right.

Saul Shalvi, & David Leiser (2013). Moral Firmness Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 93, 400-4007 DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2013.03.014

This article by Tom Rees was first published on Epiphenom. It is licensed under Creative Commons.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

September 28, 2013

Do the right thing and hang the consequences!

Next Post

October 23, 2013 Drumming together

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Causes of religion - evolution Causes of religion - psychological Causes of religion - social Demographics Digest Effects of religion - health Effects of religion - psychological Effects of religion - social Notifications Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who helped Jesus carry His cross?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Peter Simon of Cyrene John Judas