|
|
Destined to lie, cheat or steal? New research finds that believing in free will can keep us honest (1/30/2008)
In an age where cheating scandals plague all levels of governments and major corporations are brought down by unethical actions, the debate about the origins and nature of how and why decisions are made play into a larger debate about genetic determinism and free will.
It is well established that changing people's sense of responsibility can change their behavior. But what would happen if people came to believe that their behavior was the inevitable product of a causal chain beyond their control -- a predetermined fate beyond the reach of free will?
In two recent experiments, psychologists Kathleen Vohs of the University of Minnesota and Jonathan Schooler of the University of British Columbia explored the link between fatalistic beliefs and unethical behavior. The results of these experiments are reported in the January issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.
Vohs and Schooler set out to see if otherwise honest people would cheat and lie if their beliefs in free will were manipulated.
The psychologists gave college students a mathematics exam. The math problems appeared on a computer screen, and the subjects were told that a computer glitch would cause the answers to appear on the screen as well. To prevent the answers from showing up, the students had to hit the space bar as soon as the problems appeared.
In fact, the scientists were observing to see if the participants surreptitiously used the answers instead of solving the problems honestly on their own. Prior to the math test, Vohs and Schooler used a well-established method to prime the subjects' beliefs regarding free will: some of the students were taught that science disproves the notion of free will and that the illusion of free will was a mere artifact of the brain's biochemistry whereas others got no such indoctrination.
The results were clear: those who were induced to have weaker convictions about their power to control their own destiny were more apt to cheat when given the opportunity as compared to those whose beliefs about controlling their own lives were left untouched.
Vohs and Schooler then went a step further to see if they could get people to cheat with unmistakable intention and effort. In a second study, the experimenters set up a different deception: they had the subjects take a very difficult cognitive test. Then, the subjects solved a series of problems without supervision and scored themselves. They also "rewarded" themselves $1 for each correct answer; in order to collect, they had to walk across the room and help themselves to money in a manila envelope.
The psychologists had previously primed the participants to have their beliefs in free will bolstered or reduced by having them read statements supporting a deterministic stance of human behavior. And the results were just as robust. This study shows that those with a stronger belief in their own free will were less apt to steal money than were those with a weakened belief.
Although the results of this study point to a significant value in believing that free will exists, it clearly raises some significant societal questions about personal beliefs and personal behavior.
Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by the University of Minnesota
New York Hotel - Savings - Mortgage - Internet Marketing
Comments:
| 1. |
Doug Rosbury |
2/11/2008 10:31:50 AM MST |
To lie, cheat, or steal are based on a belief that there is no reason to follow principles of honesty and humility if
there are no constraints on ones actions.
This is based on ones ignorance of personal responsibility. Acts of dishonesty and
evil intent are therefore practiced in pure ignorance and un consciousness. When a person becomes consious they will be less likely to feel they can get away with things. Knowing you will be required by law,both spiritual and material to pay for your indiscretions
will keep you on a path of self disipline.---Doug Rosbury
|
| 2. |
casey |
2/14/2008 6:13:18 PM MST |
This whole "experiment" is ridiculous. What is to say that the students "indoctrinated" or "primed" against free will did not actually believe in free will, even passionately perhaps? It is quite possible that some of them did and acting dishonestly anyway, whereas it is quite possible that some of the "control" group believed in evil determinism and acted honestly, regardless of their depravity. Furthermore, the "findings" may prove nothing more than determinism itself: a belief in free will determines one's behavior to a certain degree, such that he or she misses out on some opportunities; whereas an "indoctrination" in determinism determines one's behavior to a certain degree, such that s/he gains from situations like the one presented! And certainly, you can't say "the results of this study point to a significant value in believing that free will exists..." Valuable to whom? This isn't science, it's quackery. |
| 3. |
casey |
2/14/2008 6:16:20 PM MST |
This is the trouble when you mistake sociology for science. |
| 4. |
Stutz |
2/15/2008 1:50:43 AM MST |
Rear-end traffic accidents went down when the brake light in rear windows was first introduced. Then, as they became commonplace, accidents went back up to previous levels.
The point is that novelty, not the brake lights themselves, caused behaviors to change. If you've just learned about determinism, it's no surprise that your first reaction would probably to become fatalistic. As your understanding matures and life goes on, you'll very likely behave just as ethically as you did before.
|
| 5. |
John |
2/15/2008 7:35:14 AM MST |
If the test put participants on either side, at random, then this could point to clear evidence of why people do the things that they do.
Rather that make rash judgments about the results, research and determine if the test was valid. HOWEVER, my life experience says this is true and as for those around me, it proves true too.
|
| 6. |
Caleb |
2/19/2008 1:21:17 PM MST |
Although experiments like this in and of themselves do not 'prove' anything, repeated experiments and variations on this experiment that also have similar results would indicate something.
One interesting thought is that if one has fatalistic beliefs they are more apt to disassociate themselves from the consequences of their own actions as their actions aren't really theirs but are the inevitable result of fate which is beyond their control. Although there is a whole range of fatalistic beliefs (mild to severe) I have noticed a trend towards a fatalistic belief system.
One negative aspect of fatalistic beliefs is that it tends to undercut the rule of law which is key to free societies. At a certain point the freedoms afforded by a society become meaningless as that same society's desire to remove consequence from action becomes promoted.
|
Leave a Reply:
|
|
Subscribe
