The Diane Rehm Show

Great topic. I appreciate the irony of misleading the participants regarding the shredding of their tests in an experiment to test or measure dishonesty. Good for a laugh!

Big WMD's in Iraq lies, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people dead, injured, millions displaced, American soldiers dead, injured...HUGE CONSEQUENCES. Big distance between the liars and the outcomes.

What do huge lies that cause huge consequences with no accountability say to the larger public. Trickle down dishonesty and cheating

Did the guest analyze the religiosity of the participants? I'm curious to know whether religious belief played at all into participants honesty.

Jennifer in Texas

"ok to lie to keep peace at home" Interesting about how he explained lying in Judaism. So I guess he is saying that it is perfectly ok for all of the lies and cheating that the Israeli government continue to partake in. "ok to lie to keep peace at home" What a twist.

I just don't believe that there are not particular cultures that lie less than others. I believe that is a lie

Lots of interesting questions here and also lots of complexity in these questions. I guess "lying" is not a simple behavior to deal with, since in some rare instances there may be "good lies" (as, Ariely points out to save a life). Big fan of Ariely!!!

Gore Vidal has some great lines about America and hustlers but Alex Poe does too:

Vice is a monster of so frightful mien,
As, to be hated, needs but to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.
But where th' extreme of vice, was ne'er agreed:
Ask where's the North? at York, 'tis on the Tweed;
In Scotland, at the Orcades; and there,
At Greenland, Zembla, or the Lord knows where.
No creature owns it in the first degree,
But thinks his neighbour farther gone than he:
Ev'n those who dwell beneath its very zone,
Or never feel the rage, or never own;
What happier natures shrink at with affright,
The hard inhabitant contends is right.

Virtuous and vicious ev'ry man must be,
Few in th' extreme, but all in the degree;
The rogue and fool by fits is fair and wise;
And ev'n the best, by fits, what they despise.
'Tis but by parts we fellow good or ill;
For, vice or virtue, self directs it still;
Each individual seeks a sev'ral goal;
But heav'n's great view is one, and that the whole.
That counter-works each folly and caprice;
That disappoints th' effect of ev'ry vice;
That happy frailties to all ranks apply'd, Shame to the virgin, to the matron pride,
Fear to the statesman, rashness to the chief,
To kings presumption, and to crowds belief:
That, virtue's ends from vanity can raise,
Which seeks no int'rest, no reward but praise;
And build on wants, and on defects of mind,
The joy, the peace, the glory of mankind.

I believe non-religious people are less likely to be liars. They don't go to "confession" or pray their lies away by asking for forgiveness. They must be accountable to themselves and live with their behavior. And this goes for all types of bad behavior, too - not just lying.

I love the new field of "behavioral economics" - its is deviously evil (when used to make more money) :-)

Dan Ariely, You seem highly admirable yourself and almost all of what you said seemed fairly thoughtful, but many times behavioral science seems too flip about its conclusions based on its always highly limited studies. For example, concluding that the week-long crash ethics course at Princeton was ineffective simply because it did not affect your results. That leaves your audience thinking/concluding/rationalizing that ethics courses don't work.

A good researcher should go further: why these results? One idea to examine: metacommunication: a crash course may well imply to students that ethics can be quickly dispensed with before they get down to real work in the real world. On the other hand, the metacommunication of signing an honor code right before an opportunity to cheat says ethics is interwoven, unescapable, always here and now.

I tuned in just as Mr. Ariely discussed whether those intending to commit crime gave thought or were deterred by the extreme sentences much beloved of political leaders. As a younger lawyer, I had an extensive criminal defense practice -- mostly involving homicide, and infrequently drug offenses. During the ten years or so when this was my focus, I represented only one defendant who had thought ahead about the punishment he might receive for committing commercial burglary - he'd been punished many times before. All the rest, I'd estimate about 100 defendants, ONLY thought, if they thought at all, about the possibility of being caught. They never thought about sentencing which might occur thereafter. In a few cases, knowing that we had a "use a gun, go to prison" statute, they killed victims/witnesses to enhance the chances of evading capture. The other common belief was that, no matter what they had done, the "bad result" was someone else's fault. They shared that with the politicians.