Chapter 1: Testing the Simple Model of Rational Crime

 

Mr. Ariely, attempts to debunk the conventional theory about why most people commit dishonesty--i.e. that people typically engage in a pure cost-benefit analysis in which we weight the perceived likelihood of some reward and the value of that reward against the perceived likelihood of getting caught and the consequences thereof. Mr. Ariely describes his own research and experiments into human behavior and suggest that the flaw in the conventional theory stated leaves out a person's morals/values about right and wrong and whether his decision to be honest or not can be influence by morals/value. Further, he cites that the "pure logic" cost-benefit analysis doesn't take in account the inherent irrational aspects of humans and human thinking which is akin to the terrible decisions people make while addicted.

 

 

Mr. Ariely, describes the power of rationalization for our dishonesties, including why we speed, why we might cheat or lie on our taxes, and other crimes and misdemeanors. As we might expect, these rationalizations include: it won't really hurt anyone, everybody does it., I'm entitled due to (fill in the blank), and a pervasive feeling that it's okay to cheat "a little." Mr. Ariely suggests that reminding people of their morals/values is more effective in reducing dishonesty than increasing oversight or penalties for getting caught. He notes an experiment where people filled out various expense forms and found a marked increase in honesty when people signed at the top of the page that what they were about to fill out was honest and true rather than singing at the bottom of the page (when the form, and any errors or lies already had been inscribed). He offered this suggestion to the IRS for their tax forms to reduce cheating. The IRS said "no thanks."

 

Chapter 2B: Golf

 

The popularity of golf, known as "the gentleman's sport, is also chock full of opportunities and examples of cheating. Ariely covers everything from the "mulligan" (named after a Scottish guy named Mulligan who was (in)famous for his "do-overs"), to keeping score properly, moving the ball, etc. He notes one experiment where golfers made ethical distinctions between moving a ball with one's hand, foot of golf club; it appeared most felt that moving a ball with your hand was the least ethical, followed by moving with your foot, and then your club. Ariely surmised this shows how we don't view honesty as "black and white" or cut-and-dry and the further we get from an action physically or emotionally (even if we're involved) the less bad we feel about it.

 

Chapter 3: Blinded by Our Own Motivations

 

In this chapter, Ariely demonstrates through experiments and real-life examples how susceptible many or most of us are to cheating, lying, or engaging in dishonest acts when, obvious as it sounds, there is some benefit to us--be it financial, relational, career, reputation, etc. How many times have we heard about people in high places being fired for lying on or embellishing their resumes? How about salespeople ("everything is sales," it's been said) who lie or lie by omission to make that sale for our own interest or push or recommend a product or service that may be unnecessary or even dangerous?

 

Chapter 4: Why We Blow if When We're Tired

 

This was a fascinating chapter that suggests when we're not feeling well or are fatigued that there's a natural part of our brain that not only craves comfort food or unhealthy food but is prone toward immediate gratification in general and poor decision making--including lying, cheating and stealing. No wonder the 12 Step Programs are fond of the acronym "H.A.L.T." to keep our self-care good so we don't too (Hungry, Angry, Lonely, Tired).

  

Chapter 5: Why Wearing Fakes Makes Us Cheat More

 

This chapter outlined some fascinating experiments with people who wear faux or "knock-off" designer clothes or accessories. Acknowledging the power of branding and how many people do feel better when wearing higher or designer brands. Questioning the integrity of those who would buy knock-offs to begin with and their rationalizations ("it doesn't hurt anyone" and "the designer brands are outrageously high"), Ariely's experiments reveal that those who wear knock-offs are likely to behave more dishonestly when wearing those knock-offs or after having just acquired them. He also notes the dilemma of illegal downloading of movies and music and file-sharing.

  

Chapter 6: Cheating Ourselves

 

In this chapter, Ariely explores resume embellishment, steroid taking, impersonating others, looking at answers to tests, and taking various short-cuts--like the time he and a friend used a wheelchair at the airport to circumvent long lines. Ariely's theory: given the right circumstances and pressures and our increasing competition to get ahead, we are vulnerable to dishonest acts and fooling ourselves into feeling or appearing better than we really are. 

  

Chapter 7: Creativity and Dishonesty: We Are All Storytellers

 

This was a really interesting chapter in which Ariely asserts through studies and experiments which show that, generally speaking, the more creative a person is, the more correspondingly dishonest he may be. Part of this has to do with the nature of the creative brain--always thinking outside the box, rules and laws often are re-thought. My Dad, a very creative man (he was a child-prodigy pianist, writer, and trial lawyer) used to have a favorite saying: "if there's a wall, there's a way around it." Sometimes this provided good role-modeling but sometimes not. Ariely even quotes Picasso as having stated: "Good artists copy, great artists steal." He discusses how creativity can have both a good side and a dark side. When I was stealing, I was a somewhat creative thief. Now, I turn my creative side to my work: counseling clients, writing books and articles, figuring out different ways to help others and run my own business. 

  

Chapter 8: Cheating as Infection: How we catch Dishonesty germ

 

This chapter delves into how groupthink and peer pressure can influence even the most moral and ethical to bend their values. Particularly in this climate where we have seen so much in the news about corrupt politicians, corporations, cheating in schools (by teachers as well as students), it's easy to feel like dishonesty is a virus that is spreading like wildfire. Ariely also notes the power of the "one bad apple" in influencing the opinion of a group and, sometimes, the behavior of the group. I know from working with many theft addicts that when they are exposed to dishonest parents, friends, institutions, employers and co-workers, that it becomes very hard for most to resist giving in to temptation. 

  

Chapter 9: Collaborative Cheating

 

Building upon the previous chapter, Ariely suggests that if people find a partner in crime (so to speak) that, more than just witnessing cheating from afar, people in greater numbers succumb to "conspiracy." This may be why there are laws against conspiracy itself because it not only leads to more follow-through criminal behavior but the frequency and degree of the behavior likely escalates. Think about Bonnie and Clyde or the mafia or Ocean's Eleven.

 

Americans More Embarrassed To Be Caught Shoplifting Than Cheating On Their Taxes

3/29/12 Forbes Magazine by Janet Novack

  

If he cries on a public service ad, will you pay your taxes? Uncle Sam recruiting poster. 

 

A new survey suggests Americans consider cheating on their taxes more socially acceptable than shoplifting, drunk driving or even throwing trash out the window of a moving car.

 

The Shelton Group, a green marketing firm based in Knoxville, Tenn. had 1,105 Americans complete on-line surveys in an effort to find out what kind of messages will make them adopt more environmentally friendly and energy efficient products and behaviors. Towards the end of the survey, the respondents were asked directly: "How embarrassed would you be if someone you knew found out that you......" and then read a list of presumably undesirable behaviors, in randomized order. 

 

The highest percentage of respondents-73%-said they'd be "very embarrassed"  if someone they admired found out they were shoplifting, followed by 65% for driving under the influence, 59% for throwing trash out the window of a moving car, and 57% for cheating on their taxes. Another 14% said they'd be "somewhat" embarrassed by shoplifting (for a total of 87% at all embarrassed); another 17% said they'd be somewhat embarrassed by DUI (for a total of 82%) and another 21% said they'd be somewhat embarrassed by littering or cheating on their taxes (for a total of 80% and 78%, respectively.)

 

In the IRS Oversight Board's 2011 Taxpayer Attitude Survey, 84% of the public said it is "not at all acceptable to cheat on one's income taxes.'' Still, in that survey, only 66% of  the participants said they "completely agree" that "everyone who cheats on their taxes should be held accountable"  and only 72% completely agreed that "it's every American's civic duty to pay their fair share of taxes"-suggesting, as the Shelton study does, that perhaps disapproval of tax evasion is not as strong as, say, disapproval of stealing from private businesses.Suzanne Shelton, the head of the firm that commissioned the green survey (it was conducted online by Survey Sampling International), said she wasn't surprised that shoplifting and drunk driving caused more embarrassment than tax cheating. 

 

"Americans probably think screwing the IRS out of a couple hundred is not so bad,'' she said.  While her firm has been conducting green surveys for nine years, it has never asked the embarrassment question directly before and Shelton said she was surprised by a few of the other results-the high embarrassment about littering and relatively low embarrassment about smoking. Only 39% said they would be "very embarrassed" if someone they admired found out they were smoking. "I would be embarrassed if someone caught me smoking, but I'm a former smoker,'' she said. Wait a minute, haven't both President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) been known to enjoy a smoke? "I've never seen either of them do it in public. They hide it, so they're clearly embarrassed by it,'' Shelton answers.

  

 

Man Must Pay Back $1.5M Withdrawn From Casino ATMs June 28, 2012 8:39 AM

  

DETROIT (WWJ/AP) - It's payback time for a Michigan man who authorities say got more than $1.5 million from ATMs at three Detroit casinos in 2009 because of a computer glitch.

 

On Wednesday, a federal judge in Detroit sentenced Ronald Page, a 56-year-old retired Flint autoworker, to 15 months in prison and ordered him to repay Bank of America from his $2,000-a-month pension.

 

Page reportedly burned through the money playing blackjack over a two-week span.

 

Page said he's "completely apologetic." He earlier pleaded guilty to theft of bank funds.ay Page discovered he could use his debit card to withdraw unlimited amounts, but the bank caught on. They say Page withdrew amounts ranging from about $52,000 to $515,000 over 14 days.

 

By the time Bank of America realized what was going on, authorities say Page had withdrawn more than $1,543,100.

 

Defense lawyer Richard Morgan Jr. wrote in court documents Page  is a recovering alcoholic and drug addict who got hooked on gambling. Morgan said the incident was "like giving a junkie crack cocaine."

 

Morgan said Page gambled for a 24- to 36-hour stretch without sleep, The Detroit Free Press reported. After resting, Page allegedly returned to the table and continued to gamble.

 

Although Page won significant amounts during the 14-day blitz, Morgan said his client eventually lost all of it to the casinos.

 

This is a case where something for nothing turns into nothing but jail!--Ed