Eye contact reduces lying
Introduction
The perception of another individual’s direct gaze is known to influence many aspects of human emotion, cognition, and behavior (for reviews, see Conty et al., 2016, Hietanen, 2018, Kleinke, 1986, Senju and Johnson, 2009). Among other effects, another’s direct gaze has been demonstrated to increase honest and prosocial behavior. People seem to care about others’ opinion of themselves and, in situations where they are being observed by others, they behave in a more socially desirable way (Oda, Niwa, Honma, & Hiraishi, 2011). Interestingly, even a mere image of watching eyes seems to act as a reminder of such evaluative observance and hence increase positive behavior. Studies have demonstrated eye images to increase prosocial behavior, such as helping of others (Manesi, Van Lange, & Pollet, 2016) and giving money to charities (Powell, Roberts, & Nettle, 2012), and reduce many forms of undesirable behaviors, ranging from minor mischief, like taking drinks without paying (Bateson, Nettle, & Roberts, 2006), to more serious dishonesty, such as stealing bicycles (Nettle, Nott, & Bateson, 2012).
Some researchers have explained the observed results by an increased tendency for prosocial behavior, whereas others suggest that increased adherence to norms may better explain the effects. For example, in an economic game paradigm, a robust increase in the likelihood of donating money by presenting participants with a schematic drawing of watching eyes has been repeatedly demonstrated (for a review, see Nettle et al., 2013). Importantly, however, in most of these studies, the perception of watching eyes has not been found to increase the overall amount of donations, but only the probability of donating. Nettle et al. (2013) explained this as a heightened awareness of norms and increased normative behavior by the perception of others’ observance, as in such economic games, donating something, but not excessively, is likely perceived as the norm. However, not all results fit this interpretation. In one study, for example, an eye image was found to increase non-normative generosity (charitable donations that were uncommon and not socially obligated) suggesting an increase in prosocial behavior in and of itself (Powell et al., 2012).
In an inventive study, Oda, Kato, and Hiraishi (2015) examined prosocial lying and norm adherence and found watching eyes to increase norm adherence and honesty at the cost of prosocial behavior. In the experiment, participants rolled a die under a paper cup, checked the rolled number privately through a hole in the cup, multiplied the number by a certain amount of yen, and reported it on a sheet of paper. The experimenters promised to give a corresponding amount of money to charity. Therefore, in this setting, by lying and breaking the rules participants were able to give more to charity and thus act more prosocially. The results showed that, without an image of watching eyes, participants tended to lie and report the numbers as higher than was statistically expected, but in the presence of watching eyes, the numbers were reported honestly. This suggests that the primary behavioral effect of watching eyes is an increase in honesty and norm adherence, and it occurs even at the expense of prosociality. Notably though, in this study and others, which have shown a watching-eyes effect on dishonesty (Bateson et al., 2006, Nettle et al., 2012), the observed effect can be fully explained by increased norm adherence. Dishonesty, however, is not always against prevailing rules or social norms. This may be the case, for example, in telling “white lies” or in playing certain games, like poker, where bluffing is an integral part of the game. To our knowledge, no study has examined the effect in a setting where the measured form of dishonesty is not also a clear rule infringement. Therefore, a reduction in dishonesty per se by the perception of watching eyes remains to be demonstrated.
Overall, studies examining the watching-eyes effect on dishonesty are few and there is discrepancy in their results. In one study, the effect was scrutinized in three different experiments that each offered a possibility for economic or social gain by cheating (Cai, Huang, Wu, & Kou, 2015). In none of the different settings did the image of watching eyes reduce the amount of cheating by participants. The authors attributed the observed null effect to the clear anonymity of the situations (the experiments were conducted in separate cubicles and all materials were anonymous), which may have reduced the salience of reputational concerns. The finding was argued to imply that an eye image does not activate one’s moral standards of honesty, and it only alters behavior in situations where others’ opinion of oneself may be affected. Similarly, in the studies on the watching-eyes effect on prosocial behavior and cooperation, there have been inconsistent results, with some researchers failing to find any effect (Carbon and Hesslinger, 2011, Fehr and Schneider, 2010). It seems that further research on the behavioral effects of watching eyes is indicated.
To our knowledge, the effect of another’s gaze direction on actual lying in an interaction between two people has not been previously studied. This is rather surprising, as one’s own gaze behavior when lying to others has been extensively studied (e.g., DePaulo et al., 2003). Although the effect of perceived direct gaze on dishonest behavior has been previously investigated, as described above, lying directly to another person is in many ways different than the earlier mentioned forms of dishonesty, and we do not know if perceiving another person’s direct gaze reduces lying to him or her. In direct lying, the receiving end of the dishonesty is much more salient and clearly defined compared to a vague idea of a possible sufferer. Knowing who the recipient is has been shown to reduce subsequent lying to them (Van Zant & Kray, 2014). In an interactive situation, the recipient is also able to express doubts, which may further reduce the inclination for dishonesty. In studies on interaction media richness and deception, people have been found to lie more in a video-based interaction than in a face-to-face interaction, and even more in a text-based interaction (Rockmann and Northcraft, 2008, Zimbler and Feldman, 2011). An experiment that involves an interaction between two people also allows the use of genuine eye contact with a live person as a stimulus instead of an image of watching eyes. As described earlier, most previous studies on the effect have used eye images. Studies have shown that viewing a real person evokes different subjective and neurocognitive reactions in the perceiver than a mere image (Hietanen et al., 2008, Pönkänen et al., 2010, Pönkänen et al., 2011). Therefore, a live person could be expected to have different, probably stronger, effects on one’s subjective experience and behavior than a watching-eyes image. Another limitation of most previous studies is that they have compared a photo or a schematic picture of watching eyes to a completely different kind of image, such as a picture of flowers (e.g., Bateson et al., 2006). Despite this, the effect has been attributed to watching eyes and not the mere perception of an eye or a face stimulus, which remains a plausible interpretation of the results. Notably though, in one study that avoided this pitfall, an image of a direct gaze was found to increase prosocial behavior (helping of others) as compared to images of an averted gaze, closed eyes, or flowers (Manesi et al., 2016).
In the present study, the effect of eye contact on lying was investigated by using an interactive computer game of lying and catching another’s lie. In the rules of the game, lying was acceptable and thus reduced lying could not be attributed to increased adherence to norms. Participants played the game against a confederate opponent, whom they believed to be another participant. Participants were led to believe that the study was focusing on physiological responses to the game. On each game trial, they were briefly presented with a view of the opponent through a smart glass window, after which they reported to the opponent the color of a circle appearing on the computer screen. Participants were able to lie about the color in order to earn more points in the game. The opponent alternated between the use of direct and downward gaze in a pseudorandomized order. Lying was expected to be less likely on trials where the opponents directed their gaze towards the participants’ eyes instead of gazing downward.
After the game, participants were asked to complete self-report questionnaires. The watching-eyes effect has been attributed to an automatically-triggered feeling of being the target of another’s observation, which implies heightened self-awareness (Bateson et al., 2006). Arguably, this awareness of an outer perspective on one’s self could then induce favorable changes in behavior, though studies have not examined whether it mediates the effects. In accordance with the idea, however, it has been shown that another individual’s direct gaze may increase public self-awareness (Myllyneva and Hietanen, 2015, Myllyneva et al., 2015) and that heightened self-awareness is associated with increased honest and prosocial behavior (Beaman et al., 1979, Diener and Wallbom, 1976, Vallacher and Solodky, 1979, van Bommel et al., 2012). Thus, in the present study, we also measured self-awareness with a self-report scale in both gaze conditions. Heightened public self-awareness was expected in response to another’s direct gaze. The effect of watching eyes on lying was expected to be mediated by heightened public self-awareness. In addition, to examine the generalizability of lying in the game to lying in everyday life, participants completed a self-report scale of lying in the past 24 hours. A positive correlation between lying in the game and reported lying in the past day was expected.
Section snippets
Participants
Participants were 51 people aged 19–37 years (M = 24.7 years, SD = 4.1, 26 females, 25 males) recruited from email lists of the University of Tampere and Tampere University of Applied Sciences. This sample size exceeded Cohen’s (1992) recommendation for finding a moderate effect at 0.80 power (α = 0.05). The participants were all native speakers of Finnish with no reported history of neurological or psychiatric disorders. In recruitment, participants were told that they would be rewarded with a
Materials and procedure
The experiment consisted of three sections: preparations, lying game, and questionnaires. The entire experiment lasted approximately one hour. Each participant arrived in the laboratory at the same time with a confederate of the same sex. Participants were led to believe that the confederate was another participant. During the whole experiment, the confederate behaved like another participant and the experimenter treated the participant and the confederate alike. A male experimenter welcomed
Manipulation and suspicion checks
A manipulation check question was used to assess whether participants had noticed variation in the gaze direction. To the question “How often do you estimate the opponent was looking at you when the window opened and you saw the opponent?” participants estimated, on average, the proportion of trials with direct gaze to be 60.98% (SD = 23.42, range = 10–95). Because all participants reported having noticed that the opponent had, at times, both looked at them and away from them, no participant
Discussion
The primary aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of another individual’s direct gaze on dishonesty. This was achieved by using an interactive computer-assisted lying game that participants played against a confederate, whom they believed to be another participant. On each trial, participants were first briefly presented with a view of the confederate, after which they reported to the confederate the color of a circle appearing on the computer screen. Depending on the trial,
Conclusions
The perception of another individual’s direct gaze was found to reduce subsequent lying to him or her. As far as the authors know, this is the first study to demonstrate that the perception of watching eyes reduces dishonesty in a setting where the effect cannot be explained by increased adherence to rules. The present study also showed, for the first time, the watching-eyes effect on dishonesty by having a live person with alternating gaze directions as a stimulus and by measuring dishonesty
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a grant from Alfred Kordelin Foundation to J. O. H. We thank Viivi Kervinen and Otso Lensu for their assistance with data collection and Amy Richardson for her assistance in English editing.
References (50)
- et al.
Dishonest behavior is not affected by an image of watching eyes
Evolution and Human Behavior
(2015) - et al.
Watching eyes effects: When others meet the self
Consciousness and Cognition
(2016) - et al.
The cost of being watched: Stroop interference increases under concomitant eye contact
Cognition
(2010) - et al.
Can social interaction constitute social cognition?
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2010) - et al.
Effects of self-awareness on antinormative behavior
Journal of Research in Personality
(1976) - et al.
Effects of eye images on everyday cooperative behavior: A field experiment
Evolution and Human Behavior
(2011) - et al.
Development and validation of the situational self-awareness scale
Consciousness and Cognition
(2001) - et al.
Genuine eye contact elicits self-referential processing
Consciousness and Cognition
(2017) - et al.
Seeing direct and averted gaze activates the approach-avoidance motivational brain systems
Neuropsychologia
(2008) - et al.
Deception rate in a “lying game”: Different effects of excitatory repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of right and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex not found with inhibitory stimulation
Neuroscience Letters
(2014)
People recognise when they are really anonymous in an economic game
Evolution and Human Behavior
There is more to eye contact than meets the eye
Cognition
Psychophysiological responses to eye contact in adolescents with social anxiety disorder
Biological Psychology
The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: It's not how much you give, it's being seen to give something
Evolution and Human Behavior
An eye-like painting enhances the expectation of a good reputation
Evolution and Human Behavior
The observer observed: Frontal EEG asymmetry and autonomic responses differentiate between another person's direct and averted gaze when the face is seen live
International Journal of Psychophysiology
To be or not to be trusted: The influence of media richness on defection and deception
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
The eye contact effect: Mechanisms and development
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Objective self-awareness, standards of evaluation, and moral behavior
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Be aware to care: Public self-awareness leads to a reversal of the bystander effect
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
“I can't lie to your face”: Minimal face-to-face interaction promotes honesty
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting
Biology Letters
Self-awareness and transgression in children: Two field studies
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Bateson et al’.s (2006) cues-of-being-watched paradigm revisited
Swiss Journal of Psychology
Cited by (7)
Human face and gaze perception is highly context specific and involves bottom-up and top-down neural processing
2022, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral ReviewsCitation Excerpt :The effect of watching eyes in experimental economics games, such as the ultimatum and the dictator game, is debated. Some studies reported a positive pro-social effect (Baillon et al., 2013; Burnham and Hare, 2007; Haley and Fessler, 2005; Hietanen et al., 2018), while a similar pro-social effect was absent when auditory cues instead of watching eyes suggested the presence of others (Haley and Fessler, 2005). However, the review and meta-analyses of Northover et al. (2017) did not find evidence for a consistent pro-social effect of watching eyes in economic games.
Watching the watchmen: Vigilance-based models of honesty fail to explain it
2023, Philosophical PsychologyEmpirical Study of the Structure of Future Police Specialists' Professional Self-Awareness
2022, Journal of Curriculum and TeachingRobot Gaze Behavior Affects Honesty in Human-Robot Interaction
2021, Frontiers in Artificial IntelligenceVisual Attentional Orienting by Eye Gaze: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Gaze-Cueing Effect
2021, Psychological Bulletin(Not) alone in the world: Cheating in the presence of a virtual observer
2020, Experimental Economics