» Articles » PMID: 34601910

Is It Costly to Deceive? People Are Adept at Detecting Gossipers' Lies but May Not Reward Honesty

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2021 Oct 4
PMID 34601910
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The possibility that gossipers may share dishonest reputational information is a key challenge to claims that gossip can shore up cooperation in social groups. It has been suggested that imposing social costs on dishonest gossipers should increase the honesty of these reputational signals. However, at present, there is little evidence of people's willingness to impose costs on dishonest gossipers; there is also little evidence of their ability to detect gossipers' lies in the first place. This paper aims to shed light on people's abilities to detect dishonest gossip and their treatment of those who share it. To do this, we report the results of two trust game studies using the strategy method (study 1) and repeated interactions in the laboratory (study 2). We show that in an environment where gossipers tell spontaneous lies people are more inclined to believe honest than dishonest gossip. We also show that people are more likely to treat favourably gossipers they believe to be honest, but that this does not always result in more favourable treatment for gossipers who were actually honest. We discuss the implications for the potential utility of social sanctions as a tool for securing honesty. This article is part of the theme issue 'The language of cooperation: reputation and honest signalling'.

Citing Articles

Evidence that cultural groups differ in their abilities to detect fake accents.

Goodman J, Crema E, Nolan F, Cohen E, Foley R Evol Hum Sci. 2024; 6:e46.

PMID: 39703943 PMC: 11658943. DOI: 10.1017/ehs.2024.36.


Children are sensitive to the number of sources when relying on gossip.

Shinohara A, Kanakogi Y, Okumura Y, Kobayashi T R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(5):230375.

PMID: 39076785 PMC: 11285515. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.230375.


Nasty and Noble Notes: Interdependence Structures Drive Self-Serving Gossip.

Dores Cruz T, van der Lee R, Bechtoldt M, Beersma B Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2023; 50(11):1596-1612.

PMID: 37231711 PMC: 11492547. DOI: 10.1177/01461672231171054.


The language of cooperation: reputation and honest signalling.

Szamado S, Balliet D, Giardini F, Power E, Takacs K Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021; 376(1838):20200286.

PMID: 34601918 PMC: 8487738. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0286.


Gossip and competitive altruism support cooperation in a Public Good game.

Giardini F, Vilone D, Sanchez A, Antonioni A Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021; 376(1838):20200303.

PMID: 34601909 PMC: 8487737. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0303.


References
1.
Smith E . Evil acts and malicious gossip: a multiagent model of the effects of gossip in socially distributed person perception. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2014; 18(4):311-25. DOI: 10.1177/1088868314530515. View

2.
Giardini F . Deterrence and transmission as mechanisms ensuring reliability of gossip. Cogn Process. 2011; 13 Suppl 2:465-75. DOI: 10.1007/s10339-011-0421-0. View

3.
Hess N, Hagen E . Psychological adaptations for assessing gossip veracity. Hum Nat. 2015; 17(3):337-54. DOI: 10.1007/s12110-006-1013-z. View

4.
Nowak M, Sigmund K . Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature. 1998; 393(6685):573-7. DOI: 10.1038/31225. View

5.
Bond C, DePaulo B . Individual differences in judging deception: accuracy and bias. Psychol Bull. 2008; 134(4):477-92. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.477. View