Economics at your fingertips  

Gender differences in lying in sender-receiver games: A meta-analysis

Valerio Capraro ()

Judgment and Decision Making, 2018, vol. 13, issue 4, 345-355

Abstract: Whether there are gender differences in lying has been largely debated in the past decade. Previous studies found mixed results. To shed light on this topic, here I report a meta-analysis of 8,728 distinct observations, collected in 65 Sender-Receiver game treatments, by 14 research groups. Following previous work and theoretical considerations, I distinguish three types of lies: black lies, which benefit the liar at a cost for another person; altruistic white lies, which benefit another person at a cost for the liar; and Pareto white lies, which benefit both the liar and another person. The results show that: males are significantly more likely than females to tell black lies (N=4,173); males are significantly more likely than females to tell altruistic white (N=2,940); and results are inconclusive in the case of Pareto white lies (N=1,615). Furthermore, gender differences in telling altruistic white lies are significantly stronger than in the other two cases.

Keywords: lying; honesty; deception; gender differences; sex differences. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (20) Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link) (application/pdf) (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link:

Access Statistics for this article

Judgment and Decision Making is currently edited by Jonathan Baron

More articles in Judgment and Decision Making from Society for Judgment and Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jonathan Baron ().

Page updated 2021-01-14
Handle: RePEc:jdm:journl:v:13:y:2018:i:4:p:345-355