When Is It Acceptable to Lie? Interpersonal and Intergroup Perspectives on Deception

Abstract

While deception is generally viewed as an undesirable and unethical action, people evaluate some lies as more detrimental than others. This study examined factors influencing deception assessments, including the seriousness of the lie and whom it benefits. The effect of an intergroup versus an interpersonal context for the lie was examined. Utilizing 24 vignettes varying in terms of these conditions, 259 participants evaluated a lie’s appropriateness, deceptiveness, and complexity. Altruistic and white lies were viewed as less deceptive and more acceptable than self-serving and more consequential lies. Lies evaluated as least acceptable were interpersonal, serious, and self-serving compared to altruistic lies and those embedded in an intergroup context. Intergroup and interpersonal deceptions are recognized as distinct forms of lying and are evaluated differently.

Keywords:

• Deception Detection
• Intergroup Communication
• Intergroup Deception
• Interpersonal Communication

Notes

1. Lie acceptability (Oliveira & Levine, 2008), lie ability (Dunbar, Altieri, Jensen, & Wenger, 2013), and items from a scale measuring Machiavellianism (Dahling, Whitaker, & Levy, 2009) as well as the Big-5 personality inventory (John, Naumann, & Soto, 2008) were initially included in the analyses as covariates. Since none were significant, they were not included in the final analyses reported here.