how individuals’ moral identity might influence our results. We explored this question using our measure of moral identity as a control variable and then a moderator variable. Importantly, the positive relationship between the implicit association and dishonesty is robust controlling for moral identity, as well as for our previous control variables (actual performance, age, and gender), .56, .15, .001, 95% = [.26, .86]. However, b = SE = p < C.I. moral identity had significant, albeit weak relationships with the implicit association between honesty and effort (r = = .04) and with dishonesty (r = .01). This suggests that p p = −.14, −.19, individuals with high levels of moral identity were less likely to implicitly associate honesty and effort and were less likely to be dishonest. Finally, we examined an interaction term between the implicit association and moral identity. We found a significant interaction, after controlling for performance, age, and gender, .16, .03, 95% = [–.66, Specifically, the positive relationship b = SE = p = C.I. –.34, –.03]. between the implicit association and dishonesty was stronger at lower levels of moral identity than at higher levels of moral identity, suggesting that moral identity plays a role as an important individual difference (see Figure 1). In sum, Study 1 provides initial support for Hypothesis 1 that individuals indeed vary in their lay theories about the relationship between effort and honesty and that those lay theories are related to their subsequent dishonest behavior. Specifically, the more the individual associated honesty with effort, the more likely they were to cheat in an unrelated task. Additionally, we show that the influence of these lay theories on dishonesty was robust after controlling for standard demographic differences and, more importantly, moral identity.
how individuals’ moral identity might influence our results. We explored this question using our measure of moral identity as a control variable and then a moderator variable. Importantly, the positive relationship between the implicit association and dishonesty is robust controlling for moral identity, as well as for our previous control variables (actual performance, age, and gender), b = .56, SE = .15, p < .001, 95% C.I. = [.26, .86]. However, moral identity had significant, albeit weak relationships with the implicit association between honesty and effort (r = −.14, p = .04) and with dishonesty (r = −.19, p = .01). This suggests that individuals with high levels of moral identity were less likely to implicitly associate honesty and effort and were less likely to be dishonest. Finally, we examined an interaction term between the implicit association and moral identity. We found a significant interaction, after controlling for performance, age, and gender, b = –.34, SE = .16, p = .03, 95% C.I. = [–.66, –.03]. Specifically, the positive relationship between the implicit association and dishonesty was stronger at lower levels of moral identity than at higher levels of moral identity, suggesting that moral identity plays a role as an important individual difference (see Figure 1). In sum, Study 1 provides initial support for Hypothesis 1 that individuals indeed vary in their lay theories about the relationship between effort and honesty and that those lay theories are related to their subsequent dishonest behavior. Specifically, the more the individual associated honesty with effort, the more likely they were to cheat in an unrelated task. Additionally, we show that the influence of these lay theories on dishonesty was robust after controlling for standard demographic differences and, more importantly, moral identity.
effortful_honesty_final_manuscript.docx