Read The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone - Especially Ourselves by Dan Ariely Online


The New York Times bestselling author of Predictably Irrational and The Upside of Irrationality returns with thought-provoking work to challenge our preconceptions about dishonesty and urge us to take an honest look at ourselves.Does the chance of getting caught affect how likely we are to cheat?How do companies pave the way for dishonesty?Does collaboration make us more hThe New York Times bestselling author of Predictably Irrational and The Upside of Irrationality returns with thought-provoking work to challenge our preconceptions about dishonesty and urge us to take an honest look at ourselves.Does the chance of getting caught affect how likely we are to cheat?How do companies pave the way for dishonesty?Does collaboration make us more honest or less so?Does religion improve our honesty?Most of us think of ourselves as honest, but, in fact, we all cheat. From Washington to Wall Street, the classroom to the workplace, unethical behavior is everywhere. None of us is immune, whether it's the white lie to head off trouble or padding our expense reports. In The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty, award-winning, bestselling author Dan Ariely turns his unique insight and innovative research to the question of dishonesty.Generally, we assume that cheating, like most other decisions, is based on a rational cost-benefit analysis. But Ariely argues, and then demonstrates, that it's actually the irrational forces that we don't take into account that often determine whether we behave ethically or not. For every Enron or political bribe, there are countless puffed résumés, hidden commissions, and knockoff purses. In The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty, Ariely shows why some things are easier to lie about; how getting caught matters less than we think; and how business practices pave the way for unethical behavior, both intentionally and unintentionally. Ariely explores how unethical behavior works in the personal, professional, and political worlds, and how it affects all of us, even as we think of ourselves as having high moral standards.But all is not lost. Ariely also identifies what keeps us honest, pointing the way for achieving higher ethics in our everyday lives. With compelling personal and academic findings, The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty will change the way we see ourselves, our actions, and others....

Title : The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone - Especially Ourselves
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9780062183590
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 264 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone - Especially Ourselves Reviews

  • Trevor
    2019-01-21 07:37

    This might save you needing to read the book - this is the cartoon version - few years ago I read Predictably Irrational – a book that remains one of my favourite books on Behavioural Economics. The research reported in that book has just about everything going for it – it is amusing, fascinatingly interesting, clever and fundamentally undermines the core dogma of our age, that we are economically rational agents acting purely on the basis of our own enlightened self-interest.His next book, The Up-side of Irrationality wasn’t nearly as good, but it did report his 'outsourced research' conducted in India on the effects of providing large bonus pay for performance. Which is something that is better explained in Dan Pink’s book Drive. All the same, this research alone is worth the price of the book. It does much to explain the current mess we are in and even gives some indication of what we might want to do to get back out of that mess. His latest book, this one, is probably a better read than the last one, but suffers from the fact that I’ve now heard most of this research before. However, where this book really succeeds is in how it goes about explaining the consequences of this research - that is, in the story it tells. Essentially, we are all cheaters. The thing is that we do not cheat at every opportunity, as standard economic theory might have us predict, but rather, we cheat just enough so that we can go on considering ourselves to be overall ‘good people’. This is why we are less likely to cheat when reminded of the Ten Commandments or even other ethical frameworks that we don't even believe in. This is also why you might have more luck in retrieving money you left in a communal fridge than a can of coke you left there. People tend to be less ‘moral’ with the greater distance from money the thing they are ‘borrowing’ has. This also includes ‘cheating’ on tests and tax returns when the end result will be us being given money.But the most interesting research in this book, I thought, was that conducted with people who were told they were wearing fake or real designer sunglasses. Dan found that if you thought you were wearing fake sunglasses you were more likely to cheat on other tests they got you to take. The reason being that such sunglasses are purchased as a kind of display of status – meant to display of the wealth of the owner. Wearing fake sunglasses of this type – ridiculously expensive bits of plastic purely designed as status symbols – is a kind of lie, but unlike other lies we tell ourselves, it is a soul destroying one. If we take the can of coke from the fridge it is an act which is over in no time and we can probably rationalise our action – remembering back to the time we lost food from a communal fridge or something similar. But with fake designer sunglasses you are constantly reminded of the fact that you are a fraud, the crime never goes away, is always present to us and our sense of self, as the only point of the sun glasses is to display something we are not as if we were. And this has a bad effect on our likely attitude to other situations requiring some moral fortitude. We are much more likely to say, oh, bugger it, why not? Essentially, Ariely is arguing the slippery slope.Like I said, a lot of this book has been said before, but this does frame the research in very interesting ways and I think the narrative structure works well. This was a fun read – but Predictably Irrational is still his best book.

  • David
    2019-02-10 05:53

    How can such a depressing book be so much fun to read? Dan Ariely is an excellent author; I've read two of his previous books, and I haven't been disappointed yet. Ariely combines a light-hearted writing style, a solid set of psychology studies (many of which he personally conducted), and a big dose of common sense. Many of Ariely's findings are not intuitive at first glance--but he is able to explain his findings and make them understandable to the reader.Ariely shows why we cheat--but with a limit. We do not cheat to the maximum extent possible, even when it is possible to get away with it. Instead, most people think of themselves as honest. We cheat somewhat, but not enough to call into question our self-image of being "basically honest". The book describes a bunch of psychology experiments where subjects are able to cheat without obvious consequences, and thereby earn some extra money. Ariely does an excellent job at showing the various factors that inhibit or encourage dishonesty. He discusses cheating on tests, politicians and bankers (bankers cheat more than politicians!), golf players (who tend to cheat a lot!), cheating by people of different nationalities (all nationalities and cultures tend to cheat about the same amount), cheating by people in groups, and by religious people (no different from non-religious).Ariely discusses plagiarism by students, and ordered an essay on the subject of cheating from an essay mill. He received an essay consisting of gibberish that wouldn't be satisfactory for any student. He concludes that essay mills are not a problem. But, I think that this single bit of anecdotal evidence is not exactly convincing.Ariely constantly looks for approaches that may help to reduce cheating on tax forms, insurance claim forms, and on college tests. He comes up with a number of good, practical suggestions, none of which is going to be used very much in the near term. This is a fun book, easy to read, and absolutely fascinating.

  • Aryn
    2019-02-13 00:35

    When I was in college I learned a bit about the Simple Model of Rational Crime which basically states that people lie/cheat by rationally looking at the pros and cons and make a decision based on that. Needless to say, this never sat right with me. People don't make rational decisions, they just don't.In this book Ariely puts forth another theory, one that he calls the Fudge Factor. The theory goes that there are basically two opposing forces when we decide whether to lie or cheat. One of the forces is that we want to think of ourselves as good and righteous people. The other force is that we want to get more out of situations. So the question is: how much are we willing to "fudge" the truth and still think of ourselves as honest and good people?Through quite a few experiments, Ariely explores this, along with what may influence it in one way or another. Personally, these theories and experiments sat a lot better with me than the SMORC ever did. The author makes lying and cheating an incredibly interesting topic, and the experiments are novel and informative. The author is clearly an entertaining person and knows how to tell a good story. This book basically felt as though he wanted to show off his super-awesome experiments and findings, excitedly. It made it a fun read.My biggest complaint is that in all the experiments the reward far outweighed the consequences of being caught. What about in situations, like cheating on a spouse, where the consequences could possibly destroy lives? What about when the consequences outweigh the reward, and yet we lie/cheat anyway?Ariely, what would you make of this?: A few years back, my boyfriend at the time had a soft-top Jeep. One morning we came outside to find that someone had cut out the back window, and gotten into the car. The thief left all the expensive electronics (stereo, ipod, etc), but took all the change off the floor. It seemed like the guy had gone through quite a lot of effort for a fairly minuscule reward.(Book Received Through Giveaways)

  • Christine Cavalier
    2019-02-15 03:56

    See this review on my blog: “cheat” on crosswords. I don’t cheat, exactly. I don’t look at the answer key; THAT would be Cheating, with a capital C. Instead, I cheat with a lower case c; I Google or Wiki the subject of the difficult clues online. This only works for clues with keywords like an author’s name or a movie title, but the answers I find give me enough forward motion to continue solving the puzzle. If I get stumped again, I scan the clues for more keywords again.I don’t consider this letter-of-the-law Cheating, because I am working to find the solutions instead of just getting them from the answer key. You may be a crossword purist who is appalled at my lack of morals. You’d be making a mistake, though, to think my morals (when it comes to crosswords) are based on the same assumptions you hold.It all comes down to why I do crossword puzzles in the first place. You, M. Purist, may crave the challenge and the self-esteem boost when successfully completing a NYT Friday entry. I, on the other hand, find it relaxing to lazily Internet-search trivia and methodically fill in the tiny squares with the gems I find, while learning a bit in the process.Am I cheating myself? I don’t think so. After all, I’m learning things and relaxing. I’m not entering any crossword competitions. I’m not even going for bragging rights. For me, crosswords are a rote exercise. My methods work for me. In fact, M. Purist, I think your snobby morality about how crosswords should be done is elitist and exclusionary. Upon hearing my theories, one crossword-abandoning friend of mine lit up with discovery. She had stopped doing the puzzles because their difficulty proved unsurmountable, but when we talked she realized she’d been cheating herself out of a fun pasttime because of her overblown sense of “what’s right” in crossworddom. Call us cheater-mcgeeters if you must, but my friend and I are happily googling away our grids.Duke researcher and EBE (Economic Behaviorist Extraordinaire) Dan Ariely may side with the crossword purists on this one. In his latest book, The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone–Especially Ourselves (THTAD), Dr. Ariely cites his own research and research of close colleagues on the subject of cheating. From 
“Fun with Fudging” and the “What the Hell Factor,” Ariely examines many different ways we cheat consciously and unconsciously. His clever experiments are great at catching unwitting people at the pervasive self-deception that none of us seem to be able to resist.The book is probably his toughest read yet. I found Predictably Irrational to be a fun and delightful read. The Upside of Irrationality was a tiny bit more challenging. THTAD is by far the most research and dilemma-heavy of the 3. Perhaps it is the subject matter and being faced with my own shortcomings, but it seems this book had the least amount of engaging anecdotal evidence of Ariely’s signature storytelling charm. While reading THTAD, many times I found myself fading, in that reading-college-textbooks-at-midnight way. I don’t recall this feeling with the other two books.My meandering could be the disgust factor at work. Ariely mentions Enron and Bernie Madoff, as well as Wall Street and the 2008 crash, then goes on to explain how cheating can be social and become contagious. It’s hardly light fare, despite Ariely’s attempts to soften the blow with his self-deprecating and at times mischievous humor.Nonetheless, I read the book carefully in its entirety, even though I’d have to backtrack often to where my mind checked out and begin again; Ariely’s insights into human behavior are useful in life and in business. In this book, I learned why I shouldn’t trust the car repair guy I’ve known forever, why I should draw pictures of eyes and hang them on the snack cabinet, why a stack of dollar bills are more likely to stay in tact than my lunch in the work fridge, and why, as a creative person, I may have less gray matter in my brain than you dull types out there.Where the book falls short, besides the lack of Ariely’s personal stories, is in the area of some needed philosophical talk about morals. Ariely hints at the possibility of varying moral codes when he talks briefly about the perception of cheating in different cultures, but he fails to lay down a common compass from which we all discern our moral directions. Ariely assumes we’re all following a letter-of-the-law approach to Cheating, and that his experiments’ subjects could only be following that same (supposedly Judeo-Christian) approach. But I think Ariely would’ve done well to take a paragraph or two to lay out his assumptions/biases. We can surely infer the basic Western moral sense, but if Ariely took some time to lay out what exactly he thinks is the official definition of “Cheating”, even if only within the confines of his own experiments, his assertions about how we all unconsciously cheat would hold all the more punch. Although his matrices experiment designs seem pretty rock solid, there is a possibility that Ariely may have missed two totally different motivations behind cheating: etiquette and convenience.In Chapter 9: Collaborative Cheating: Why Two Heads Aren’t Necessarily Better than One, Dr. Ariely presents some findings that suggest we cheat more with others and/or for others’ benefit (“altruistic cheating”). Earlier in the book, he also cites “karma” as a way we justify taking a few extra pens from work when they failed to give us our yearly bonus. But I think this is where Ariely missed an opportunity to explore the finer-tuned aspect of cultural etiquette and convenience. Sometimes certain behaviors are expected for reasons unknown to us, but we’re savvy enough to pick up on signals sent by those around us. For example, in Ariely’s bad-actor experiment (the actor David portrayed “bad” decisions, not that David was poorly skilled at theatrical arts). When David asked whether or not he should cheat, the researcher said, “You can do what you want.” David then obviously cheated and was not rebuked. This is such an odd occurrence in life, it’s possible that the real subjects in the experiment may have surmised that the researcher actually preferred (for whatever mysterious reason) that the subjects cheated. Perhaps it would get her the results she wanted. Who would deny her? It would be more polite, then, to do what is expected and cheat like David (or find a moral middle ground and cheat a little more than normal, which is what the subjects did).Another experiment Ariely cited was done in a coffee shop. Customers were handed too much change, and Ariely wanted to see how many people would return the excess, and how much of it they'd return. I’m deeply familiar with this very scenario, because I’ve experienced it more than once with my fanatically scrupulous father, who has been known to get into restaurant-silencing arguments over bills for being undercharged. Those cringe-worthy moments of my youth taught me that it’s better etiquette to leave a heftier tip in case the waitstaff notices the error later than to argue that we need to pay more. Perhaps Ariely would just call this "picking-up-on-signals" the collaborative effect, but I find it slightly different than what he describes as “group cheating” in the book.I run into a collaborative effect everyday here in the suburbs, but again, it isn’t group cheating as much as it is a cultural norm. Take the library loans of music, for example. I am under the impression that if I check out Nicki Minaj’s lastest CD, I am to listen to it but not download it. If I download it to be able to listen to it, I should delete the album when I return the CD to the library. My father and my brother (also a stickler) would delete the files. They would also argue (probably loudly) with people on the street about how everyone should delete any music not bought through legitimate outlets. But if word got out around my town that I was making my tween delete the music she borrowed from the library, I’d get the reputation of an overly strict, trifling and somewhat-crazy parent. Put simply, it would be just plain weird.Another example of this peer-pressure-to-accept-certain-rules is living in an organized-crime dominant area, which I did growing up. I dare not talk about it too much (for obvious reasons), but I will say that our views on the definitions of “crime” and “wrong” didn’t necessarily match up to say, a nice Midwestern Mayberry-type town’s views. We thought of ourselves as looking more at the big picture: The police? They weren’t the most “upstanding” group. Electronics companies? What, the ones with the child labor in Indonesia? Bankers? Don’t get me started! We were keeping a whole region of the state, thousands of families, afloat, mostly via legitimate means. What were all those people doing for anybody? Who wants a stickler around, anyway? Rule-followers, pencil-pushers, Miss Manners, they only see right in front of their own noses. Where I come from that’s a very immature (and definitely no-fun!) way to be.Ariely does mention the social aspect behind cheating, as I said. And I may just be lying to myself, as he would say. But I do believe there are subtle signals we send to each other that tell us how we are expected to behave, and I wonder if any of those signals came into play in Ariely’s experiments. This isn’t the strongest of criticisms, of course. It’s a trifling point, a fixation on minutiae, a party-pooper whine. But I guess, like my father, I’m set to be the one that messes up everyone’s good time.________________Tomorrow I’ll be sitting in on a conference with Dan Ariely. I’ll let you know how it goes. In the meantime, let me know if you have any questions for him.Any thoughts? Have you read the book? What did you think?

  • Orsolya
    2019-02-05 04:50

    We all admit to telling ‘white lies’ or cheating/bending the truth and usually, several times a day. How often do we admit to (and even realize) that we also lie to ourselves to the point of believing our own dishonesty? Best-selling author, professor, and cognitive psychologist Dan Ariely explores the topic in, “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone- Especially Ourselves”. Ariely instantly dives into thought-provoking and interesting dialogue regarding the topic of dishonesty combining cognitive psychology, behavioral psychology, and elements of neuroscience; while presenting this in an accessible way that is easy-to-understand for all pop-psych readers. The resulting product is a fast-paced text tinged with humor. The negative side of this is that “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” is too basic and simplified; not elaborating or diving deep enough. Oftentimes, the information feels ‘obvious’ and abruptly cuts off before the true connections are made or theories are proven. This causes the facts revealed inside “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” to be less than memorable and not mind-blowing. On the other hand, the most striking (and applauded) feature of “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” is the fact that almost all of the experiments/tests described are first-hand conducted either by Ariely or his immediate peers. This is highly notable and makes the book stand out, as most other books nearby on the book shelf tend to be filled with secondary sources and experiments which aren’t related to the topic at hand (many psych books use the same experiments but describe them per their own theories making the arguments weak). Thus, Ariel’s research and expertise on the subject makes the text more credible. On a related note, Ariel stylistically includes some of the actual documents/tests/charts used in the experiments and even encourages the reader to try them personally again helping to put “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” on a ‘fun’ and approachable level. Ariel’s writing weakness is a certain level of choppiness within the text bouncing around on the topic within chapters – sort of like a book that is ADHD. Although this doesn’t make “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” confusing; it does break reader attention.Slightly past the halfway point, “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” loses some steam as Ariely begins to cite more personal observational studies versus hard science having little backing and explanation. The text also becomes quite repetitive causing the entire reading to be somewhat slow and without any excitement or merit. The final chapter of “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” sums up some of Ariel’s theories and offers tips concerning the battle with dishonesty. Sadly, these suggestions are bare-boned and thus the conclusion feels weak and forced. This flows into a unique compilation of mini biographies of Ariely’s fellow collaborators (including personal information about how the author knows each). These pages are unique as I have not seen this in other psychology books. Sadly, the notes and bibliography are shamefully thin and take away from the credibility and academic value of the text. Overall, “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” is a relatively well-written work (flows smoothly and is entertaining) but some execution flaws are apparent. The text could have also been strengthened with more detail and elaboration but this makes it a strong introduction on the topic to the general reader. “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” isn’t ‘bad’; it just isn’t a life-changer. Regardless, “The Honest Truth about Dishonesty” is suggested for those interested in the social sciences, behavioral economics, and psychology; seeking a quick but interesting read.

  • Malda
    2019-01-29 01:44

    The honest truth is, we are all dishonest.I want to share a real life scenario that happened with me just yesterday right after I finished reading Dan Ariely's new book The Honest Truth About Dishonesty.The situation: An anonymous person at our office refills the office refrigerator with a dozen small water bottles, everyday. They’re stacked in the top compartment on their own, unlocked, unmarked, un-anything. They’re just there. Sinister, isn't it? Next to that fridge are two water coolers that are obviously for everyone to use. So who are the bottles for?The reasoning: In terms of water consumption, I personally prefer having a bottle on my desk rather than walking back and forth to the kitchen for a glass of water. At other times, I either forget, or get too lazy to get my own supplies, and that’s when my dishonest behavior kicks in.The bad behaviour: I found that I was occasionally opening the fridge and helping myself to one water bottle knowing that they belonged to someone else. In the beginning it was discreet but after going unnoticed for so long, I gradually stopped putting effort in hiding and carried on believing that I was actually entitled to a free bottle of water from our shared office fridge. I’m not sure if I was the only one taking a bottle, but let’s just say I wasn’t.Yesterday, I confidently made my way to our lovely pantry, opened the fridge, and there it was! A warning note that read, “Please don’t touch!” *ominous music* I didn’t dare touch anything this time, even when there was no one around. I then spent the rest of the day hiding under my desk anticipating arrest and imprisonment.This is the general idea of the book (without going into spoilery details.) The author, Dan Ariely, whose previous bestsellers include Predictably Irrational and The Upside of Irrationality, conducts different experiments in similar situations to mine, low-risk, low-stakes scenarios where sometimes there are no consequences whatsoever to being dishonest, and then he uncovers some pretty shocking truths regarding just how far we would go as supposedly "honest" people.It’s a 10-chapter popular psychology book that covers various situations, contexts, and settings that affect human behavior and decision-making when it comes to being dishonest. Ariely is known for his cheerful writing style by which he usually includes his personal stories in between experiments and eases off scientific/psychological analyses for the light user looking for a good read.The analysis: Read the book. But pay for it first....

  • Oana Sipos
    2019-02-03 07:03

    My rating is 5 because it is that kind of book which made me reflect upon my own behaviour. On the one hand, because of some mistakes and the stories I told to myself, and on the another hand because it was a confirmation for the times I felt really bad, as I was aware of my action. First thoughts when trying to predict what is the book subject, were that it's most probably a book about cheating in relationships and cheating for becoming richer. Sorry to disappoint you, but it's not about cheating in relationships as you might have expected too. Instead, you get some conclusions based on experiments. I was always expecting numbers, but by the end of the book you get a sense that Dan is critic enough not to draw conclusions out of superficial experiments.Most interesting aspects found out:- we are more likely to cheat if we know that others will benefit from our dishonest action- the stories we tell to ourselves not to feel bad about ourselves when we are dishonest- that the cheating level is about the same in different countries (experimented in USA, Israel, Italy, Turkey, Canada and England).Two particular passages that I found particularly powerful are:"Most people cheat just enough to still feel good about themselves.""This experience taught me that sometimes (perhaps often) wedon’t make choices based on our explicit preferences. Instead,we have a gut feeling about what we want, and we go through aprocess of mental gymnastics, applying all kinds of justificationsto manipulate the criteria. That way, we can get what we reallywant, but at the same time keep up the appearance—to ourselvesand to others—that we are acting in accordance with our rationaland well-reasoned preferences."

  • K
    2019-02-13 07:47

    I feel a little bad about the three stars. I enjoy Dan Ariely's entertaining and informative books about behavioral economics and the many ways in which we are far less rational than we want to believe. Exploring the topic of honesty from a variety of angles appeals to me as well, and true to form, Ariely highlighted many interesting aspects of honesty/dishonesty -- contagion of dishonesty, how a sense of altruism and collaboration can facilitate dishonesty, the relationship between creativity and lying, how a sense of depletion or deprivation can use up valuable will power so that we have fewer resources for self-control to do the right thing, etc., etc.So why only three stars? I think a lot of it was that audio was probably not the ideal venue for this book, at least for me. Although I can enjoy popular nonfiction on audio, it can also be a bit of a harder sell. Other goodreaders complained about Ariely's repeated use of a matrices test as a stimulus for measuring cheating. I can't really blame Ariely for reusing the same test if that's what worked, and the point wasn't the test itself but what he was exploring. So I don't think that was the problem, but I'm not sure why I occasionally felt overloaded and overwhelmed with research descriptions and data and wanted more narrative.Since I often found myself spacing out I can really only give this three stars, but don't let that put you off from trying the print version which I suspect was a more rewarding experience.

  • Jaylia3
    2019-02-03 05:36

    Entertaining, eye-opening, disturbingThis funny, fascinating, personal paradigm shattering book is in a genre I love, books that make me examine my thinking process, but this one caused me more soul searching than any other I’ve read. According to the Simple Model of Rational Crime (SMORC) we decide whether or not to be dishonest based on a logical, mathematically calibrated cost-benefit analysis, and we’d all be as dishonest as we could be as long as it brought us a benefit greater than the likely cost. Fortunately, author Dan Ariely discovered that people aren’t as cold-bloodedly calculating as that. Unfortunately, the news about human morality isn’t all good.Ariely is very skilled at conceiving, conducting and describing experiments that tease apart the tangle of human motivations. According to what he’s discovered, we’ll cheat, lie and steal, but only as much as we can rationalize because we want to be able to feel good about ourselves. We’re all capable of dishonesty, and being natural story tellers we’re extremely adept at creating perfectly logical seeming explanations justifying our less than moral actions, though we rarely understand exactly why we make the choices we do. We invariably underestimate how much we are influenced by a myriad of circumstances ranging from conflict of interest to how tired we are feeling.Since we want to see ourselves as good, most of us never stray far from the straight and narrow path, but small frequent transgressions can create bigger problems than the egregious acts of a few bad apples. Our collective peccadilloes can wreck havoc, but with an improved understanding of the situations that increase dishonest behavior Arliey hopes his book can be a guide for corrective actions and legislation.

  • Farhana
    2019-01-26 06:43

    Either 3.8/5 or 4.2/5 .This one is intriguing. Ariely's writing is easy to follow. It's so fluent, spontaneous and most importantly, he explained everything in simple words with examples & experiments avoidingcomplex theories & technical jargon. He discussed psychology behind dishonesty. And if you think about it you'll see that many fundamental cues behind dishonesty are accepted as normal behavior or treated as an open secret. For example, in lab experiments when the result seems to be incorrect, we do some back calculations, fudge the data to make the result look right or give proxy attendance for our friends or classmates who are absent in the class. And even in larger scale, nationwide cheating in public exams by leaking question papers before the exam! And so on.The book's simplicity will touch anyone. If you ponder over the ideas in it, it will be an eye opener.

  • huzeyfe
    2019-01-23 04:38

    Dürüstlük her zaman sorgulanagelen bir kavram. Bu kitap da cok güzel somut deneylerle ve verilerle bu kavramı biraz daha iyi anlamamızı sağlıyor.Dili, akılcılığı ve mantıklı ornekleri ile bir cok noktada ufuk açtığı gibi cok detayli düşünmemizi sağlıyor.Daha iyi bir review ve bir kez daha okumayı hak eden müthiş bir kitap.

  • Dale
    2019-01-20 02:41

    To be published in June of 2012 (DWD's Reviews received an uncorrected proof advance copy) by Harper.Dan Ariely's The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty is a fun look at a serious topic - lying. Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at Duke University, describes his simple experiments and details his results in a light, easy to understand way. His results are often surprising and counter-intuitive.For example, it is often considered that people are dishonest because they have calculated the risk of being caught and the reward if they get away with the dishonesty and act accordingly. Ariely demonstrates that this is incorrect and spends the rest of the book showing what conditions are more likely to cause dishonest behavior and what conditions decrease dishonesty.This could have been a stupefyingly dull book, but Ariely deft touch makes it a very fun and very quick read.

  • Shiri
    2019-01-29 05:56

    Loved the newest installation from Dan Ariely. I'm a huge fan so I'm already biased, but this book was a breezy read and very insightful. It was also disturbing and slightly distressing, as the main premise is that most harm to society comes from normal people each cheating just a little bit, then rationalizing it to fit in our personal "fudge factor". With connections to many great researchers, including Roy Baumeister of "Willpower" fame (among others), Ariely presents a delicate balance between wanting to conceive of ourselves as honest human beings and wanting to maximize gain. Ego depletion and the "what-the-hell" effect can induce us to cheat more. Even creativity is not safe, as Ariely's inventive experiments include one that shows a correlation between lying and creativity: the more creative we are, the more creative stories we can spin to justify our behavior.I will point out one issue that bothered me throughout the book, and which Ariely briefly mentions near the end of it: the "matrix" task on which a large portion of these experiments relies on, is not really a task that people perform on a regular basis. It's possible that cheating in laboratory conditions is higher (or lower! as in the cultural comparison Ariely discusses) depending on the context in which people are in. It would be fascinating to see if the conclusions would hold in more mundane, everyday tasks.All in all, a great book and highly recommended, especially for Ariely aficionados. If you're thirsty for more Ariely and have finished his other books, you should also check out his free Coursera class.Finally, a word of warning: If you're a normal human being who has ever in your life cut corners in some way, be prepared to painfully release the conception of yourself as a good and honest person. Ariely's no-bs approach that taking a pencil from the office is qualitatively identical to ripping off the public in Wall Street may well send you to your therapist's office -- or to the confessional -- in an urgent need to "reset" your perception of yourself as a decent person. And yes, Ariely talks about that too(!), including a brief discussion of Yom Kippur and other religious holidays as resetting rituals. As for me, I'm going to wash my filthy hands and go atone for my sins.

  • Alain Burrese
    2019-02-13 05:45

    "The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone - Especially Ourselves" by Dan Ariely is a fascinating look at cheating and dishonesty. Backed by research, Ariely provides explanations for the unethical behavior that seems to be endemic from Washington to Wall Street, the classroom to the workplace, and everywhere else you turn.It is interesting to see that irrational forces are often behind whether we behave ethically or not, and cheating and dishonesty are not merely derived from a cost-benefit analysis. The more engaging element of this book is Ariely's ability to make his research interesting, engaging, and relevant. It was not only an educational book, but a very engaging and entertaining one too. One of the many things I found interesting was the conclusion from an experiment that suggested that the probability of getting caught doesn't have a substantial influence on the amount of cheating. This is just the opposite that I thought would happen and that I suppose many others would believe too.The book explores why we cheat others and why we cheat ourselves. One especially interesting part were the findings of how people only cheat "a little bit" so they can still consider themselves honest and good. It was also interesting when some experiments showed people would cheat to help others more than themselves, and at other times how certain things such as reminding people about honesty could decrease the amount of cheating. The opposite is also true, with findings that wearing "fakes" can lead us to cheat more. Think having a stronger relationship with a professional will reduce the likelihood of the professional acting for a self-interest when faced with a conflict of interest? Think again! The chapter on conflicts of interest and being blinded by our own motivations sheds some interesting light on this topic as well.I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book, and it explained occurrences I've seen in others and myself. It provided information for me to use when maintaining my own honesty as I try to raise honest children and influence others with ethical behavior. As the author concludes, once we better understand what really causes our less-than-optimal behavior, we can start to discover ways to control our behavior and improve our outcomes. Ariely's "The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty" is definitely a start to better understanding what really causes cheating and dishonesty, and it is a book I recommend highly to anyone interested in this field of study.

  • Arvin
    2019-01-31 01:50

    A really great look into the current research into how/why people cheat/lie to other people and even to themselves. The book is well written, well paced and I personally think the topics discussed are fascinating.I really like Dan Ariely's (Professor of Psychology and Behavioral Economics at Duke, formerly of MIT) books because:His writing is easy to understand and has a playful entertaining tone. His anecdotes always add to the topic being discussed - unlike Daniel Kahneman, Nobel prize winner and mentor to Dan Ariely, who drones on and on about himself and his co-researcher for no good reason in his book "Think Fast and Slow".All of the area he discusses are support by actual research that has been done, often himself - versus someone like Malcolm Gladwell who is more of a journalist looking to "collect interesting stories." Instead of just throwing unsupported conclusions at the end, he actually tries to apply the findings of his research in the real world(like getting people to not cheat on taxes or their insurance claim). There are some areas he is interested in, but admits he can't talk too much about them, because he hasn't been able to do any experiments to test his hypothesis (never stopped Malcolm Gladwell... or Steven Dubner on global warming in Superfreakomics, a disappointing followup to Freakonomics).He does a lot of followup studies to try and answer questions left open from his initial results. That is he doesn't take it for granted that you will automatically accept his finding as correct. On the flipside, he has often noted that some people have commented that the results of research as "obvious." So instead he had people predict what his findings before giving that actual results. It turns out if people are not "forced" to commit to position before finding the "correct" answers, they delude themselves that they "knew it all along" - he devotes an entire chapter to this. BTW, that's why you do so well on those magazine quizzes that have the answers on the back page.

  • Jennifer Rivera
    2019-01-31 23:55

    I absolutely loved this book because of the author’s interesting findings, easy to read style, and outside applications.The findings of cheating/ being dishonest might surprise many of us mainly because some of the things we do is unconscious and not robotic. (I won't provide any spoilers here, but if you are interested in any social behavior of human beings, then this is a book I highly recommend for you, especially if you want to know more about human immorality.)Although many of the studies conducted by the author, Dan Ariely, are in a laboratory, many of his findings can be generalized to majority of the people in many countries (he proved this by explaining one of his experiments that he conducted internationally). Not only that, but he also includes past experiments from other researchers, and a field study that he conducted with the help of his friends to find out why people cheat/lie. This book is also very easy to read and because it is around 255 pages, you can quickly finish it and understand much of the content. This is very good, especially if you want to research more about the topic of human morality, dishonesty, cheating, and etc. If that's not enough, the author inputs many of his own dishonesty and shows the reader that he is also human and isn't immune to many temptations of cheating that we all face. He proves that we are all cheaters and liars in multiple situations. Although there are ways to decrease cheating and lying, there are also ways to increase it (and about 2 ways to neither decrease nor increase the amount of cheating/ lying, even though our intuitions claim these two ways have an effect to it).Since reading this book, I will actively try to become more moral, especially as I grow up, therefore I recommend this book to anyone and everyone so as a society we can grow from understanding ourselves better.

  • Michael Siliski
    2019-01-24 00:34

    An interesting topic, though pretty familiar ground if you have any exposure to behavioral economics and/or cognitive psychology. Feels a bit rote, lifeless overall. A straight survey of the material. Takeaways:* Standard classical model of dishonesty/cheating is SMORC – simple model of rational crime – which says we cheat when it's in our rational interest. EV is positive, or expected payoff is greater than the risk of getting caught and the associated punishment.* SMORC is false. Ariely calls his alternative the "fudge factor" theory, which basically says that cheating is rampant in all scenarios, whether the payoffs are big or small, but only by small amounts. People cheat just enough so they can still tell themselves they are still good people. Even when there is zero risk of getting caught.* Probably the most interesting thing is just how common cheating is by these small amounts. I think it conflicts with how most people think about it.* Points on self-deception are really interesting. For example, people overestimate their abilities on a test based on having just lied about their previous score, even though they should know that that's meaningless in terms of actual performance.

  • Grouchy Editor
    2019-02-18 00:48

    In all honesty, this book was a letdown. The human propensity for lying and cheating should be a juicy topic, but Ariely manages to squash reader interest by (mostly) confining his experiments to sterile classrooms, where one group of student volunteers after another pencil in answers to one dull test after another, usually involving dotted matrixes, one-dollar bills, and paper shredders. When Ariely and colleagues DO leave the artificial environment of the classroom –- sending a blind girl into a farmers’ market to buy tomatoes, for example –- their research yields some interesting results.But back to that classroom … our intrepid social scientist’s big discovery is this: We all cheat, but only a little bit. And if we can just get a few reminders that cheating is bad, maybe we won’t do it so much.That’s not exactly a scientific breakthrough; it’s simple common sense. And that’s the brutal truth.

  • Sara
    2019-02-02 01:02

    I read this book in one sitting. It is a fascinating look into the inherent dishonesty that lies in all of us. We all cheat. Just a little. White Lies, Pens from the office, travel expenses, etc. But what is interesting is what allows us to cheat; What factors are in place that let us choose to cheat and by how much we will cheat; And how we trick ourselves into rationalizing our cheating. It's a bit disheartening, and perhaps a bit relieving, to know it just apparently in our nature and that to control it we need to be monitored. The book is an easy, entertaining and quick read. Like many of these types of books, in order to fill up pages there is a small amount of repetitiveness. But not nearly so much as others I could name that fill up 40 to 50% of the book by repeating themselves.

  • Dũng Nguyễn
    2019-01-21 07:53

    A must read on Behavioural Economics/Psychology. Dan Ariely explained how we cheat and how we find excuses for all our little lies. I was impressed by Dan's so-called "Fudge Factor", and other factors on his experiments that make us irrationally lie. This book is absolutely fun and yet still informative.

  • Olivia
    2019-02-14 23:59

    Dan Ariely (so far) never ceases to impress me in his quest to unlock the secret of human irrationality. In his third book, he puts dishonesty on the centre stage. I read it, I am hooked, I love it.First, I admire his passion and ability to narrate researches using layman language in a way that makes readers feel as if they're involved in the journey. It makes me able to appreciate research more - you see something, no matter how trivial it is, that intrigues your interest, design the research creatively and voila you learn something new.Second, related to the content of the book. Through experiments he and his colleagues conducted, he takes readers to question what generally people assume to be the cause of dishonesty and what can curb it. Assumption A: Personality. People cheat because they are (pathologically) dishonest people to begin with. What research shows: Nice people can cheat given some circumstances.Assumption B: Simple rational model of crime. What causes nice people to cheat is the benefit of cheating outweighing the cost. The bigger the benefit is (e.g. the amount of money) and the more unlikely for them to be caught, the more they cheat.What research shows: The amount of money and probability of being caught are not significant forces that shape cheating or dishonesty. Interestingly if the benefit reaped from cheating is too big, people tend not to cheat. From this point, Dan Ariely shows why simple model of crime is not adequate to explain dishonesty - it neglects the point that people want to see themselves having a good moral and their 'ability' to cheat depends on how they can reconcile or rationalise cheating with this desired view of self. Then Dan Ariely opens our eyes on irrational forces which unconsciously drive people to cheat and rationalise their behaviour. Surprisingly simple everyday circumstances 'tempt' people to cheat, even as trivial as sporting counterfeit products. Even more surprising, sometimes, good values our society praise, such as altruism, creativity, can also drive people to cheat. Based on these learnings, Dan Ariely also gives suggestions on ways to curb dishonesty. Some of the suggestions, he already tested it. However there are complex situations where he admits he does not have the silver bullets that can solve everything.And that brings me to the third reason why I like this book so much: the author's honesty that stays true to the book's title "The (Honest) Truth about Dishonesty. The author admits other factor such as cultural influences might play a big role on dishonesty and he realises readers might expect it to be given a big portion in this book. Apparently some experiments have been replicated in other countries yet it yields similar results. This 'honesty' reflects on the conclusion takes account of the limitation of tests he used:"Our matrix test exists outside any cultural context. That is, it's not an engrained part of any social or cultural environment. Therefore, it tests the basic human capacity to be morally flexible and reframe situations and actions in ways that reflect positively on ourselves. Our daily activities, on the other hand, are entwined in a complex cultural context."On explanation on why there is no chapter about infidelity in this book:"With all of this complexity, nuance, and social importance, you might wonder why there isn't a chapter in this book about infidelity and why this rather fascinating topic is relegated to one small section. The problem is data. I generally like to stick to conclusions I can draw from experiments and data. Conducting experiments on infidelity would be nearly impossible, and the data by their very nature are difficult to estimate. This means that for now we are left to speculate - and only speculate - about infidelity."Back to the silver bullets problem, one might ask, "if there is no silver bullet, what's the use of knowing all of these?" I think this book has served its purpose - widen our perspectives on dishonesty. "... dishonesty is a prime example of our irrational tendencies. It's pervasive; we don't instinctively understand how it works its magic on us; and most important, we don't see it ourselves.The good news in all of this is that we are not helpless in the face of our human foibles (dishonesty included). Once we better understand what really causes our less-than-optimal behavior, we can't start to discover ways to control our behavior and improve our outcomes."By understanding irrational forces that can drive us to cheat, it is now our task to start finding ways to control our behaviour. First, start from the man/woman in the mirror. Then, think critically whether as a citizen when reviewing policies or coming up with idea to solve social problems (e.g. how to prevent corruption, how to tackle institutionalised blackmail in law enforcement) or as an aspiring 'Of The People, By The People, For The People' policy makers when designing policies (e.g. how to stay loyal to the people instead of drifting to corruption and any practice that puts self-interest/elite's interest above all)

  • Cesar Diez Sanchez
    2019-01-26 07:56

    A practical book talking about how our honesty works in different scenarios. Very interesting, to be honest.

  • Breakingviews
    2019-02-09 05:55

    By Martin LangfieldIt is said that the philosopher Diogenes the Cynic roamed ancient Athens with a lamp in daylight to search for an honest man. Dan Ariely, a professor of psychology and behavioral economics, uses more modern research techniques for a similar quest. He reports his findings in a new book, “The (Honest) Truth About Dishonesty.” Diogenes said he found nothing but scoundrels. Ariely is more nuanced: most people will cheat, given half a chance, but only to the point where they can still tell themselves they are honest. The limit is useful, but dishonesty is contagious, and can be fostered by anger, fatigue, self-regard and misguided altruism, among other sometimes unexpected factors the author lists. Even things people wear can encourage it. Yet oddly simple tricks can rein in the urge to lie. Ariely focuses less on grand-scale cheating than on the small-time ways people fudge the numbers, or massage the truth, to their advantage. He and his academic colleagues conducted behavioral experiments on thousands of subjects that involved the chance to earn small amounts of money for taking a standardized reasoning test under carefully varied conditions. Many of the set-ups gave participants the opportunity to cheat by inflating their self-reported scores. While the odd “bad apple” participant would misbehave in a big way, walking off with all the available money after grossly misrepresenting his or her test scores, the experimenters found much more cash ended up going cumulatively to people who just fudged things a little, reporting higher scores in the tests than control groups who had no chance to cheat. The extent of the cheating would vary, depending on whether, for example, an honor pledge was invoked before the tests (cheating was minimal then) or a participant was seen by everyone else to be grossly dishonest without repercussions (cheating was high in those experiments, which Ariely dubbed the “Madoff condition” after convicted Ponzi scheme fraudster Bernard Madoff). Dishonesty was also fostered if a person who was seen overtly cheating was a member of the test-takers’ own social group, but far less if the overt cheater was an outsider; dishonesty was higher if people were rewarded with tokens instead of real money; and dishonesty even was higher if test-takers wore designer sunglasses they believed to be counterfeit, compared to subjects wearing shades they believed to be authentic, and to subjects not knowing either way (all the sunglasses were in fact identical and authentic). Even the idea of fakeness can have a corrosive effect on behavior. Ariely finds the most powerful forces affecting how much people cheat are their susceptibility to social influence - which is far greater than most people allow - and their capacity for self-delusion. Most people involved in the collapse of Enron or in slapping investment-grade ratings on dodgy mortgage-backed securities before the financial crisis didn’t think of themselves as dishonest people, he posits. But a little wishful blindness can go a long way. “This is where our amazing cognitive flexibility comes into play,” he writes. “… As long as we cheat by only a little bit, we can benefit from cheating and still view ourselves as marvelous human beings.” A person might cheat in one area of life to take revenge for events in another, to claim a reward for self-denial, to avoid a confrontation, to help out another person or to burnish a reputation (think of corporate bosses or politicians exaggerating their academic credentials and military records). In each case the liar has a story which justifies the act as deserved, necessary, too small to matter or even noble. What can hold temptation in check? Even atheists will cheat less after swearing on a Bible, and even a drawing of a watching eye will make people behave better in the area it surveys. Ariely concludes that being regularly reminded of moral or ethical codes, feeling watched or supervised, signing or swearing undertakings to be honest and seeing others behave honorably are all conducive to greater honesty - though perhaps too much of all that could have the opposite effect. People are not all that bad, he writes. Most are fairly honest most of the time. But people are not all that good either.

  • Hoại Băng
    2019-01-30 00:02

    Quyển sách này phân tích những lý do, cũng như những yếu tố tác động lên con người khiến họ trở nên gian dối hoặc thực hiện hành vi gian lận. Những thí nghiệm xã hội được đưa ra trong sách khá thú vị và hợp lý. Những kết quả của các thí nghiệm đó cũng vô cùng lý thú. Quyển sách này thì chúng ta có thể dùng nó để phản tư bản thân, xem thử chúng ta đã từng gian dối như thế nào. Có một số ý tưởng bất ngờ như càng sáng tạo, con người càng dễ gian lận, hay mặc đồ giả cũng có thể khiến con người gian dối hơn.Dễ đọc và tương đối lý thú. Ai quan tâm đến tâm lý học hành vi và xã hội thì nên đọc. Ngoài ra tác giả có viết thêm những mở rộng trong thế giới tài chính và chính trị thì mình cũng không chú trọng lắm. À mà ông tác giả này cũng từng gian manh phết.

  • Adrian Scoica
    2019-02-15 02:53

    If you want to understand how large organizations (empires, countries, banks, corporations, etc.) collapse, you should read this book.Ariely explains that lying (or cheating) is a normal human mental process, just like being funny or wanting sex. If given the opportunity to cheat and not get caught, the majority of people will do it. There are a few important factors that stimulate cheating (and unlike being funny, cheating is EXTREMELY contagious in groups of people):(1) The cheater does not feel the consequences of their actions. For example, killing a fox and skinning it is morally harder than (1) asking someone else to get the fur for you, and (2) in the process exchanging with the hunter some "money".(2) The cheater witnesses someone else in their peer group cheat and get away with it. For example, if John Smith didn't pay tax and still got elected CEO, then why should you pay tax?(3) The cheater is able to rationalize their action in a way in which they are actually the good guys. For example, people who steal from work think that they are actually paying themselves for their boss's injustices. It's even worse if one can justify destructive and selfish acts as being "for the good of others", in a full-blown messiah-asshole complex.Once cheating takes root in a group setting, it amplifies until it erodes all trust in the law of the group, and therefore destroys it. This is how bonus and promotion-seeking bankers cheated on their paperwork until the entire banking system collapsed in 1929 and in 2008. This is how bonus and promotion-seeking corporate executives at Enron cheated on their paperwork until the corporation was destroyed. This is also how almost every employee in communist Soviet Union cheated until the entire economy imploded.If you're ever in a situation in which almost everyone around you cheats and gets away with it, get away FAST-the entire structure will collapse soon.

  • Andrew Macfarlane
    2019-01-31 02:46

    Dan Ariely writes casually, informatively and convincingly on a topic that many of us will have pre-conceived opinions and hypotheses about. Dishonesty is part and parcel of being human, and as Ariely unravels, is often done for reasons other than being immoral/rebellious. As part of my own field, I have to read through academic psychology journals, and so it's a rewarding treat to have experimental methods told to me as if from a friend: you will find no 'x number of participants were recruited in a double-blind, counter-balanced, nested paradigm...etc..'. Instead, he'll tell you the bare minimum you need to know in order to follow him through his, and his collaborators, often ingenious experiments. If I had to express some qualms, it would be the idea that we should all be cheating more often as predicted by SMORC, and by implication, that the SMORC is useless. Agreed, the SMORC is much too simple, but to use one of Ariely's examples: if a lady in a coffee shop asks us to look after her laptop whilst she goes to the toilet, we should take the opportunity to walk away with the laptop. This ignores all sorts of catastrophic thoughts people can generate with worst case scenarios. Sure, if I liked the lady, I wouldn't take her laptop because I'm a decent person. But if she was rude to me, I still wouldn't take it, because I'd be worried that the law enforcement agencies might have clever ways of finding me, or because the laptop might be traceable, or because CCTV might have caught me. We don't always know the probability of getting caught, so in absence of this information, overestimating it seems the safe bet. I think Ariely misses this point.A very illuminating read, and one that will keep me thinking about these matters for some time to come.

  • Yainely
    2019-01-23 23:40

    Out of all the books I read I think "The Honest Truth About Dishonesty" by Dan Ariely was the most interesting one. I learned many new things about myself with this book. Like the example from the book about the coke and the money.It proved to us that most humans would be willing to steal something that cost money, which in this case the coke then steal the amount of money that the coke was worth ($6) and buy it ourselves. I put myself in this situation and I probably would have done the same thing. Us humans see that stealing both things isn't right so we choose to still steal one but steal the less valuable one (in the way that we see it) even though its worth the same thing.One thing I liked about the book is that it used many studies to prove their point and showed diagrams so that readers can get a better understanding.The experiments and the results of those different studies were very entertaining to read and I really enjoyed it.Something I learned from this book was that everyone does cheat even if its on little things and sometimes people don't even realize it. In today's society some people even think its normal and don't see anything wrong about it because they are just used to seeing everyone doing it. Another thing I learned about this book was the things that motivate people to cheat. I wasn't expecting most of these things at all. One thing I didn't like about this book was that some things were mentioned more than once but in different ways and with different examples just to prove the same thing. I would definitely recommend this book to psychologists and adult readers that have always wondered why most people are dishonest. It gets you thinking and its very informative.

  • Diane
    2019-01-21 07:44

    Honestly, this is not my normal type of book, but it would be dishonest to say I didn’t like it. (ok, ha ha) I was surprised when this book arrived from the library (my wonderful library sends me books I request as they become available). Did I really request this? Oh, yes, I was impressed with Cheryl’s review and must have asked for it. I was a bit skeptical about reading it but I am glad that I did. A good advertisement for the benefit of GoodReads.Author Ariely defines honesty broadly, including cheating on a diet and the acts of those involved in Enron scandal. I enjoyed the way he broke down questions and set up experiments, letting tasks like counting dots or doing problems stand in for life events. I tend to see things rather intuitively and can have trouble breaking things down into small bits and his approach was insightful. I liked the way signing a document (such as your income tax form) BEFORE you fill it in seemed to induce honesty or reading the Ten Commandments before doing a task made you more honest even if you were an atheist. I could not swallow the information on cheating ourselves more if we wore “fake” name brands; he seems to have forgotten people like me (and other old hippies) who don’t even know what the name brands are. One of the most interesting revelations was that nearly everyone seems to be minimally dishonest; I consider myself mostly honest, but can point to lots of small dishonesties. The author takes a mostly amusing attitude toward life and toward his profession that I found fun; I don’t know how well it wears in reality.This is a quick and easy book to read and I found it worthwhile and thought it would be a fun book to talk about in a group. Thanks, Cheryl in CC

  • Jie Hui
    2019-02-20 05:43

    Human beings cheat because we want to benefit from cheating, but at the same time still view ourselves as honest and respectable beings. That is why we cheat a little when we have the opportunity to do so, and tend to be comfortable with the behavior when the consequence is one step removed from monetary consequence. Moreover, we are good at justifying our behavior so that we can still be a honest being in our view. Other factors that influence our misbehavior and cheating: conflict of interest, depletion (as depicted in another book Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, that's why we should not make decisions when we are tired), a single act of dishonesty (once we started, our morality level will be lower and... what the hell, I have already done it, so why not go all the way), others benefiting from our dishonesty, watching other people being dishonest (dishonesty is infectious) and culture that encourages cheating. By understanding how well we can tell stories to justify our misbehavior, this book provides us an opportunity to explore why and how we cheat, and how to prevent or reduce dishonest behaviors. One of the effective way, according to Dan Ariely, is to remind people of the misbehavior right before it happens. A famous example is the picture of watching eyes on a notice in pantry's honesty box, reminding people to at least deposit some money before helping themselves with the drinks. Direct monitoring from someone outside your social circle is useful too. A lot of thinking points to be explored so that we can improve ourselves and the society. If only people in government and other sectors will read this.

  • Melissa Hurtado
    2019-01-24 23:42

    Book review Melissa HurtadoPeriod 2A Level PsychTo many, cognitive dissonance is a negative feeling, however few find it to be motivational. In this book, honesty reveals itself to the readers and stirs a little regret in them. I have always found me lying to myself whether it's telling myself that I'm okay or that I will eat fruits for breakfast. Men are born sinners and will sin out of innate behavior. Dishonesty is a behavior conjured up to be disliked and shunned ever since it was of a morale. Why do we shun it so much if we all do it? How do we get ride of it? How do we spot a liar? All of these questions are answered in the book. It explains that cheating or lying is not decided by a cost reward analysis. Studies in the book showed that people cheated less when they had more rewards. I enjoyed the accurate research and date put into the book. Multiple case studies allowed me to open my eyes to the truth about dishonesty. Something that I definitely did not enjoy is how most of the studies that showed the results from the book were in a lab. Therefore, most result could've been unreliable. What some people might not like about the book are the rough situations they are put in while reading the book. It exposes various truths about how we lie every day. There is also no such things as a white lie. The book itself is to help others search themselves and others for dishonesty and how to treat it. I've learned to apply some tips that I got from the book. I highly recommend the book to everyone.