66 Scientific American, September 2019
FABRICE COFFRINIGetty Imagescommonly held beliefs (which we assessed among a
different set of participants) about how these coun-
tries vary, we did not find more cheaters in countries
with high corruption levels (such as Colombia) than in
countries with low corruption levels (Germany).
So why do we observe huge international diff er-
enc es in levels of corruption and bribery? It turns out
that although individuals’ innate tendencies to be-
have honestly or otherwise are similar across coun-
tries, social norms and legal enforcement pow erfully
in fluence perceptions and behaviors. In 2007 econo-
mists Raymond Fisman and Edward Miguel pub-
lished a study of parking violations among United Na-
tions diplomats living in Manhattan. They found that
diplomats from high-corruption countries accumulat-
ed more unpaid parking violations. But when enforce-
ment authorities could confiscate diplomatic license
plates of offenders, the number of unpaid vio lations
decreased significantly. Their work suggests that cul-
tural norms and legal enforcement are key factors in
shaping ethical behavior.PROBING DEEPER
BUT WHAT ARE the psychological mechanisms involved
in the exchange of a bribe? Behavioral researchers have
examined these in the lab and the field. For example, in
recent research behavioral economists Uri Gneezy, Sil-
via Saccardo and Roel van Veldhuizen studied the psy-
chology behind the acceptance of bribes. They con-
ducted a lab study with 573 participants, divided into
groups of three. Two participants competed for a prize
by writing jokes, and the third chose the winner. The
writers could bribe the referees by including $5 in an
envelope when submitting their entry. Gneezy and his
colleagues studied how referees reacted and how re-
ceiving a bribe distorted their judgment. They found
when the referees could keep only the winner’s bribe,
bribes distorted their judgment, but when the refer-ees could keep the bribe regardless of
the winner, bribes no longer influ-
enced their decision. This study sug -
gests that people are influenced by
bribes out of self-interest and not be-
cause they want to return the favor to
whoever paid the bribe.
In related studies, published in
2017, Nils Köbis, now at the University
of Amsterdam, and his colleagues test-
ed the idea that severe corruption
emerges gradually through a series of
increasingly dishonest acts. They
found that, in fact, participants in
their four experiments were more
likely to behave unethically when giv-
en the opportunity to do so in an
abrupt manner—that is, when tempt-
ed with a single opportunity to behave
unethically for a large gain rather
than when faced with a series of choic-
es for small benefits. As the researchers concluded,
“some times the route to corruption leads over a steep
cliff rather than a slippery slope.”
Given how damaging corruption is to societies, we
believe it is crucial to further probe its psychological
roots. Three areas beg for future research. First, we
need a fuller accounting of what drives a culture to-
ward less ethical behavior. What, for example, prompts
someone to ask for a bribe? What impacts the likeli-
hood of accepting a bribe? Second, what are the conse-
quences of bribery? Clearly, bribery and, more broadly,
dishonesty are contagious. But future research could
investigate the lasting effects of bribery over time and
across domains: What happens when people are con-
sistently exposed to bribes? Does re curring exposure
to bribery strengthen or weaken the effect of bribes on
individual dishonesty? Last, what kinds of interven-
tions would be most effective in reducing bribe solici-
tations and acceptance?
Going back to our initial example, we see that the
corrupt exchange that the City Hall employee offered
might have seemed trivial or at least be considered an
isolated event. Sadly, a single bribe request will affect
the requester and the recipient. And notably, its dom-
inolike effect can impact many individuals over time,
spreading quickly across a society and, if left un-
checked, entrenching a culture of dishonesty.MORE TO EXPLORE
The (Honest) Truth about Dishonesty. Dan Ariely. HarperCollins, 2012.
(Dis)honesty: The Truth about Lies. Documentary starring Dan Ariely.
Directed by Yael Melamede. Bond/360, 2015.
FROM OUR ARCHIVES
How the Trust Trap Perpetuates Inequality. Bo Rothstein; The Science
¹ ́yÕùD ̈ïĂj3`y ́ï` ®yà`D ́Î`¹®jÈùU ̈åym¹ ́ ̈ ́y%¹ÿy®UyàÀj÷ĈÀ~Î
scientificamerican.com/magazine/saFAKE DOLL AR
BILLS thrown
by a protester
swirl around
FIFA’s then pres-
ident following
a 2015 corrup-
tion scandal.