Cited by 2

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The positive effect of moral self-concept on fraudulent behavior and the need for moral cleansing

Keller, Tamás, Szakál, Péter·2025·Scientific Reports

Abstract

Both moral cleansing and moral licensing theories suggest that moral self-concept positively influences subsequent engagement in fraudulent behavior. Specifically, a decrease in moral self-concept reduces dishonesty (moral cleansing), while an increase promotes it (moral licensing). However, within these theoretical frameworks, prior research has rarely measured moral self-concept directly, and even fewer studies have manipulated it experimentally. As a result, a direct test of the role of self-concept in these theories is still lacking. This study addresses this gap by experimentally manipulating and directly measuring moral self-concept to examine its relation to subsequent fraudulent behavior. A large-scale randomized experiment was conducted among Hungarian university students, using a subtle priming intervention that urged participants to recall their past moral transgressions. This manipulation effectively lowered moral self-concept, which in turn reduced dishonest behavior, as measured by the fraudulent misreporting of numbers rolled in a monetarily incentivized “die-under-the-cup” task. This causal chain aligns with the theory of moral cleansing. Using the randomized treatment as an instrument, the study has identified a positive causal effect of moral self-concept on fraudulent behavior, indicating that a decrease in moral self-concept reduces fraudulent behavior.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41598-025-16403-9

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 40

  1. Blasi, A. Bridging moral cognition and moral action: A critical review of the literature. Psychol. Bull. 88, 1–45 (1980). · DOI
  2. Aquino, K. & Reed, A. The self-importance of moral identity. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83, 1423–1440 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Jacobsen, C., Fosgaard, T. R. & Pascual-Ezama, D. Why do we lie?? A practical guide to the dishonesty lie?terature. J. Econ. Surv. 32, 357–387 (2018). · DOI
  4. Shalvi, S. et al. The Science of Honesty: A Review and Research Agenda. at (2024). https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/at4xc · DOI
  5. Shuster, A. & Levy, D. J. Contribution of self- and other-regarding motives to (dis)honesty. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–11 (2020). · DOI
  6. Ariely, D. & Norton, M. I. How actions create – not just reveal – preferences. Trends Cogn. Sci. 12, 13–16 (2008). · DOI
  7. Verschuere, B. et al. Registered replication report on mazar, amir, and Ariely (2008). Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 1, 299–317 (2018). · DOI
  8. Aquino, K., Freeman, D., Reed, A., Lim, V. K. G. & Felps, W. Testing a Social-Cognitive model of moral behavior: the interactive influence of situations and moral identity centrality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 97, 123–141 (2009). · DOI
  9. Ashforth, B. E. & Lange, D. Beware of organizational saints: how a moral Self-Concept May foster immoral behavior. In Organizational Wrongdoing: Key Perspectives and New Directions (Cambridge University Press, 2016). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316338827.012. · DOI
  10. Young, L., Chakroff, A. & Tom, J. Doing good leads to more good: the reinforcing power of a moral Self-Concept. Rev. Philos. Psychol. 3, 325–334 (2012). · DOI
  11. Mazar, N. & Zhong, C. B. Do green products make Us better people? Psychol. Sci. 21, 494–498 (2010). · DOI
  12. Blanken, I., van de Ven, N. & Zeelenberg, M. A. Meta-Analytic review of moral licensing. Personal Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41, 540–558 (2015). · DOI
  13. Gneezy, U., Imas, A. & Madarász, K. Conscience accounting: emotion dynamics and social behavior. Manage. Sci. 60, 2645–2658 (2014). · DOI
  14. West, C. & Zhong, C. B. Moral cleansing. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 6, 221–225 (2015). · DOI
  15. Gino, F., Norton, M. I. & Ariely, D. The counterfeit self: the deceptive costs of faking it. Psychol. Sci. 21, 712–720 (2010). · DOI
  16. Nisan, M. & Horenczyk, G. Moral balance: the effect of prior behaviour on decision in moral conflict. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 29, 29–42 (1990). · DOI
  17. Dutton, D. G. & Lake, R. A. Threat of own prejudice and reverse discrimination in interracial situations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 28, 94–100 (1973). · DOI
  18. Steele, C. M. The psychology of self-Affirmation: sustaining the integrity of the self. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 21, 261–302 (1988). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Sachdeva, S., Iliev, R. & Medin, D. L. Sinning saints and saintly sinners: the paradox of moral self-regulation. Psychol. Sci. 20, 523–528 (2009). · DOI
  20. Ploner, M. & Regner, T. Self-image and moral balancing: an experimental analysis. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 93, 374–383 (2013). · DOI
  21. Zhong, C. & Liljenquist, K. Washing away your sins: threatened morality and physical cleansing. Sci. (80-). 313, 1451–1452 (2006). · DOI
  22. Fischbacher, U. & Föllmi-Heusi, F. Lies in disguise-an experimental study on cheating. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 11, 525–547 (2013). · DOI
  23. Schnall, S., Benton, J. & Harvey, S. With a clean conscience: cleanliness reduces the severity of moral judgments. Psychol. Sci. 19, 1219–1222 (2008). · DOI
  24. Sobel, M. E. Identification of causal parameters in randomized studies with mediating variables. J. OfEducational Behav. Stat. 33, 230–251 (2008). · DOI
  25. Abeler, J., Nosenzo, D. & Raymond, C. Preferences for Truth-Telling. Econometrica 87, 1115–1153 (2019). · DOI
  26. Bryan, C. J., Adams, G. S. & Monin, B. When cheating would make you a cheater: implicating the self prevents unethical behavior. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 142, 1001–1005 (2013). · DOI
  27. Ioannidis, J. P. A. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2, e124 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Kouchaki, M. Vicarious moral licensing: the influence of others’ past moral actions on moral behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101, 702–715 (2011). · DOI
  29. Sophocles translated by Paul Woodruff. Antigone. (Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis / Cambridge. (2001).
  30. Zell, E., Strickhouser, J. E., Sedikides, C. & Alicke, M. D. The better-than-average effect in comparative self-evaluation: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 146, 118–149 (2020). · DOI
  31. Alicke, M. D. & Sedikides, C. Self-enhancement and self-protection: what they are and what they do. Eur. Rev. Soc. Psychol. 20, 1–48 (2009). · DOI
  32. Welsh, D. T. & Ordóñez, L. D. Conscience without cognition: the effects of subconscious priming on ethical behavior. Acad. Manag J. 57, 723–742 (2014). · DOI
  33. Gino, F. & Mogilner, C. Time, money, and morality. Psychol. Sci. 25, 414–421 (2014). · DOI
  34. Savir, T. & Gamliel, E. To be an honest person or not to be a cheater: replicating the effect of messages relating to the self on unethical behaviour. Int. J. Psychol. 54, 650–658 (2019). · DOI
  35. Baiocchi, M., Cheng, J. & Small, D. S. Instrumental variable methods for causal inference. Stat. Med. 33, 2297–2340 (2014). · DOI
  36. Mead, N. L., Baumeister, R. F., Gino, F., Schweitzer, M. E. & Ariely, D. Too tired to tell the truth: Self-control resource depletion and dishonesty. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45, 594–597 (2009). · DOI
  37. Keller, T. & Kiss, H. J. Do exhausted primary school students cheat more? A randomized field experiment. PLoS One. 16, e0260141 (2021). · DOI
  38. Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. The Mind in the middle: A practical guide to priming and automaticity research. In Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology 253–285 (Cambridge University Press, 2000).
  39. Cohn, A., Maréchal, M. A. & Noll, T. Bad boys: how criminal identity salience affects rule violation. Rev. Econ. Stud. 82, 1289–1308 (2010). · DOI
  40. Abadie, A., Athey, S., Imbens, G. & Wooldridge, J. When Should You Adjust Standard Errors for Clustering? http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA443813 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3386/w24003 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Keller, T., & Szakál, P.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-08-29
Volume
15
Issue
1
ISSN
2045-2322
Cited by
2
References
1
Language
en
Funders
HUN-REN Centre for Social Sciences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The positive effect of moral self-concept on fraudulent behavior and the need for moral cleansing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41598-025-16403-9
The paper
Keller, T., & Szakál, P. (2025). The positive effect of moral self-concept on fraudulent behavior and the need for moral cleansing. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-16403-9