Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Deceit as a function of sex of subject and target person

  • 27 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

Thirty male and female undergraduates were run in same- and opposite-sex pairs to determine if the extent of experimentally sanctioned deceit would be influenced by sex pairings and potential for harm to another's self-esteem. Ss, who all believed they were playing the role of a “teacher” in a learning experiment, were instructed to provide false feedback (lie) at least three times during 30 trials to a “learner,” the other S. Consistent with hypotheses derived from a consideration of the potential harm to another's self-esteem and a suggested norm of “white lying,” perceived relative importance of male and female sex roles, and greater female concern for the social welfare of others, it was found that “white lies” occurred significantly more often than lies, that males were significantly more likely to give false feedback than females, that females were the target of false feedback significantly more often than males, and that the interaction between sex of S and sex of target person was also significant in that males lied to females more than any other sex pairing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Gamson, W. A. Experimental studies of coalition formation. In L. Berkowitz, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 1964.

  2. Ilg, F. L., & Ames, L. B. Child behavior. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955.

  3. Kitay, P. M. A comparison of the sexes in their attitudes and beliefs about women: A study of prestige groups. Sociometry, 1940, 3, 399–407.

  4. Kutner, B., Wilkins, C., & Yarrow, P. R. Verbal attitudes and overt behavior involving racial prejudice. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1952, 7, 649–652.

  5. LaPiere, R. T. Attitudes versus actions. Social Forces, 1934, 13, 230–237.

  6. Neill, A. S. Summerhill: A radical approach to child rearing. New York: Hart, 1960.

  7. Post, E. Children are people. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1945.

  8. Sherriffs, A. C., & Jarrett, R. F. Sex differences in attitudes about sex differences. The Journal of Psychology, 1953, 35, 161–168.

  9. Stotland, E., Sherman, S., & Shaver, K. Empathy and birth order: Some experimental explorations. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1971.

  10. Tyler, L. The psychology of human differences (3rd ed.) New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, 1965.

  11. Whiting, B. B., Six cultures: Studies of child rearing. New York: Wiley, 1963.

  12. Wicker, A. W. Attitudes versus action: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioral responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 1969, 25, 41–78.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Kenneth E. Mathews Jr..

Additional information

This research was partially supported by the New Mexico Highlands University Institute of Scientific Research. A brief version of this report was presented at the Rocky Mountain Psychological Association meeting, Denver, May, 1974.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mathews, K.E., Cooper, S. Deceit as a function of sex of subject and target person. Sex Roles 2, 29–38 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289296

Download citation

Keywords

  • Social Psychology
  • Target Person
  • Female Undergraduate