People who tell small, self-serving lies are likely to progress to bigger falsehoods, and over time, the brain appears to adapt to the dishonesty, according to a new study.
The finding, the researchers said, provides evidence for the “slippery slope” sometimes described by wayward politicians, corrupt financiers, unfaithful spouses and others in explaining their misconduct.
“They usually tell a story where they started small and got larger and larger, and then they suddenly found themselves committing quite severe acts,” University College London associate professor of cognitive neuroscience Tali Sharot said.
She was a senior author of the study, published on Monday in the journal Nature Neuroscience.
Everyone lies once in a while, if only to make a friend feel better (“That dress looks great on you”) or explain why an e-mail went unanswered (“I never got it”).
Of course, some people lie more than others, but dishonesty has been difficult to study. Using brain scanners in a laboratory, researchers have sometimes instructed subjects to lie to see what their brains were doing.
Sharot and her colleagues devised a situation that offered participants the chance to lie of their own free will and gave them an incentive to do so.
A magnetic resonance imaging scanner monitored brain activity, with the researchers concentrating on the amygdala, an area associated with emotional response.
Participants in the study were asked to advise a partner in another room about how many pennies were in a jar. When the subjects believed that lying about the amount of money was to their benefit, they were more inclined to dishonesty and their lies escalated over time.
As the lying increased, the response in the amygdala decreased and the size of the decline from one trial to another predicted how much bigger a subject’s next lie would be.
These findings suggested that the negative emotional signals initially associated with lying decrease as the brain becomes desensitized, Sharot said.
“Think about it like perfume,” she said. “You buy a new perfume and it smells strongly. A few days later, it smells less and a month later, you don’t smell it at all.”
Functional imaging is a blunt instrument and the meaning of fluctuations in brain activity is often difficult to interpret.
Sharot agreed that the study could not determine exactly what type of response the decreased activity in the amygdala represented.
“We know for sure it’s related to lying,” she said. “Whether it’s their negative emotional reaction, that’s only speculation, based on the parts of the brain we looked at.”
However, the researchers included numerous checks on the study’s results and replicated some parts of it before publication.
The research was led by Neil Garrett, a doctoral student at University College London at the time. Dan Ariely of Duke University and Stephanie Lazzaro of University College London were also coauthors of the report.
University of Zurich professor of decision neuroscience Christian Ruff said that in previous research it had been “really, really difficult to characterize the neural processes that underlie purposeful lying.”
The new study provided one way of doing that and showed the importance of considering the emotional component of dishonesty, he said.
Brown University psychologist Amitai Shenhav, who has studied moral decisionmaking, also praised the study, calling it “nicely executed.”
He said the findings were “suggestive of a slippery slope,” but he added that it was still not entirely clear what was driving people down that slope.
For example, it could be that the act of lying by itself increased the propensity for acting dishonestly, “like gradually pushing our foot off a brake,” or that the subjects, who were not punished in any way for their dishonesty, concluded that lying in that environment was not so bad, Shenhav said.
“We need to be cautious when generalizing to real-world dishonesty that is typically associated with threats of reprimand” or damage to someone’s reputation, he said.
In the study, the subjects — 80 adults, most of them university students — were asked to help the unseen partner guess the number of pennies in the jar. The partner, the subject was told, would then tell the researchers the guess. (The partner was in reality a confederate of the scientists.)
In some cases, the subjects were given an incentive to lie: They were told that they would be paid more if their partners overestimated the money in the jar and that the higher the overestimation, the more they would be paid.
However, their partners’ payments would depend on how accurate the estimates were.
In other cases, the participants were told that both they and their partners would be paid more for overestimating the number of pennies; others were told that their payments depended on the accuracy of the estimates, while their partners would be paid more for overestimating.
Garrett said he hoped that the study could be repeated in other, more realistic, settings and that another study could be done to look at what might stop people from escalating their dishonesty.
“How do you stop it? How do you prevent it?” he said.
Ruff said that if the findings from this study held up, the message seemed clear.
“The implication is that we should watch out that we don’t tolerate lies, in order to prevent people from lying when it really matters,” Ruff said.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and