The Economic and Interpersonal Consequences of Deflecting Direct Questions

被引:24
作者
Bitterly, T. Bradford [1 ]
Schweitzer, Maurice E. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Management & Org, Stephen M Ross Sch Business, 701 Tappan Ave,R4484, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Penn, Wharton Sch, Dept Operat Informat & Decis, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
关键词
deception; deflection; disclosure; negotiation; trust; INTEGRATIVE MODEL; PROSOCIAL LIES; DECEPTION; TRUST; MISREPRESENTATION; RECIPROCITY; ALCOHOL; ANXIETY; IMPACT; NEGOTIATION;
D O I
10.1037/pspi0000200
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Direct, difficult questions (e.g., Do you have other offers? When do you plan on having children?) pose a challenge. Respondents may incur economic costs for honestly revealing information, reputational costs for engaging in deception, and interpersonal costs, including harm to perceptions of trust and liking, for directly declining to answer the question (e.g., I would rather not answer that question.). Across 8 experiments, we explore the relative economic and interpersonal consequences of a fourth approach: deflection, answering a direct question with another question. We describe how individuals infer the respondent's communication motive from their response (e.g., a motive to seek or hide information), and how these inferences influence perceptions of the respondent's trust and likability. We contrast deflection with other types of responses and show that deflection causes significantly less reputational harm than detected deception and causes significantly less interpersonal harm than directly declining to answer a question. In some cases, deflection even yields better interpersonal and economic outcomes than honest disclosures (e.g., deflecting questions about prior acts of untrustworthy behavior).
引用
收藏
页码:945 / 990
页数:46
相关论文
共 76 条
[1]   What Is Privacy Worth? [J].
Acquisti, Alessandro ;
John, Leslie K. ;
Loewenstein, George .
JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES, 2013, 42 (02) :249-274
[2]   The Impact of Relative Standards on the Propensity to Disclose [J].
Acquisti, Alessandro ;
John, Leslie K. ;
Loewenstein, George .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2012, 49 (02) :160-174
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1978, LYING MORAL CHOICES
[4]   THE MODERATOR MEDIATOR VARIABLE DISTINCTION IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL-RESEARCH - CONCEPTUAL, STRATEGIC, AND STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS [J].
BARON, RM ;
KENNY, DA .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1986, 51 (06) :1173-1182
[5]   Negotiation [J].
Bazerman, MH ;
Curhan, JR ;
Moore, DA ;
Valley, KL .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 51 :279-314
[6]   TRUST, RECIPROCITY, AND SOCIAL-HISTORY [J].
BERG, J ;
DICKHAUT, J ;
MCCABE, K .
GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 1995, 10 (01) :122-142
[7]   The impression management benefits of humorous self-disclosures: How humor influences perceptions of veracity [J].
Bitterly, T. Bradford ;
Schweitzer, Maurice E. .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2019, 151 :73-89
[8]   Risky Business: When Humor Increases and Decreases Status [J].
Bitterly, T. Bradford ;
Brooks, Alison Wood ;
Schweitzer, Maurice E. .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 112 (03) :431-455
[9]   Deception and retribution in repeated ultimatum bargaining [J].
Boles, TL ;
Croson, RTA ;
Murnighan, JK .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2000, 83 (02) :235-259
[10]  
Brooks AW, 2018, HARVARD BUS REV, V96, P60