The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
White Lies
Open accessAbstract
In this paper we distinguish between two types of white lies: those that help others at the expense of the person telling the lie, which we term altruistic white lies, and those that help both others and the liar, which we term Pareto white lies. We find that a large fraction of participants are reluctant to tell even a Pareto white lie, demonstrating a pure lie aversion independent of any social preferences for outcomes. In contrast, a nonnegligible fraction of participants are willing to tell an altruistic white lie that hurts them a bit but significantly helps others. Comparing white lies to those where lying increases the liar's payoff at the expense of another reveals important insights into the interaction of incentives, lying aversion, and preferences for payoff distributions. Finally, in line with previous findings, women are less likely to lie when it is costly to the other side. Interestingly though, we find that women are more likely to tell an altruistic lie. This paper was accepted by Teck Ho, decision analysis.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355399556151 · Cited by 11,264
Gender Differences in Preferences
Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.47.2.448 · Cited by 5,694
Strategic information transmission
Crawford, V. P., & Sobel, J. (1982) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913390 · Cited by 4,293
Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests
Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355302760193904 · Cited by 3,970
The Dishonesty of Honest People: A Theory of Self-Concept Maintenance
Mazar, N., Amir, O., & Ariely, D. (2008) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633 · Cited by 2,875
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation
Bentham, J. (1789) · The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham: An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation · doi:10.1093/oseo/instance.00077240 · Cited by 2,196
Deception: The Role of Consequences
Gneezy, U. (2005) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828053828662 · Cited by 1,729
Self-citationCharness, G., & Dufwenberg, M. (2006) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00719.x · Cited by 1,491
DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.5.979 · Cited by 1,062
DePaulo, B. M., Kashy, D. A., Kirkendol, S. E., Wyer, M. M., & Epstein, J. A. (1996) · PubMed · Cited by 1,052
Cited by
Bolino, M. C., & Grant, A. M. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1153260 · Cited by 682
Revisiting gender differences: what we know and what lies ahead.
Meyers‐Levy, J., & Loken, B. (2015) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2014.06.003 · Cited by 614
Intrinsic honesty and the prevalence of rule violations across societies
Gächter, S., & Schulz, J. F. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature17160 · Cited by 551
Self-Serving Justifications: Doing Wrong and Feeling Moral
Shalvi, S., Gino, F., Barkan, R., & Ayal, S. (2015) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721414553264 · Cited by 422
Let’s be honest: A review of experimental evidence of honesty and truth-telling
Rosenbaum, S. M., Billinger, S., & Stieglitz, N. (2014) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2014.10.002 · Cited by 288
Metadata
- Authors
- Erat, S., & Gneezy, U.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2012-04
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 723-733
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2913265986
- Cited by
- 698
- References
- 36
- FWCI
- 89.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: White Lies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1449
- The paper
- Erat, S., & Gneezy, U. (2012). White Lies. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1449
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
