|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
Since the introduction of mental accounting, there have been numerous studies finding that the source of money might influence the way this money is spent. This includes cleaning unethically earned money by laundering it, if given the possibility to do so. This study investigates whether participants donate a different amount of money when the person they lied to in a deception game is present or absent.
|
After
Since the introduction of mental accounting, research has consistently shown that the ethical source of money influences its use. People tend to donate unethically earned money to charitable causes instead of using it for personal consumption. Thus, to weaken the guilt associated with unethical gains, individuals may engage in "mental money laundering" to justify spending decisions. This study uses a laboratory experiment to test whether participants donate a higher share of their money to charity when donating alongside the person they deceived in a game, compared to donating with a new partner ("people laundering" effect). It also examines whether participants try to justify their unethical behavior by reporting the assumption that their partner would not donate anything of her wealth. Additionally, it examines the role of personality traits, including the Big Five and the Dark Triad, in influencing donation behavior. Results show the opposite effect of the hypothesized people laundering effect with individuals spending significantly more with the new partner. Also, there are significant differences in donation behavior based on personality traits, with high extraversion, neuroticism, and Machiavellianism scores correlating with lower donations.
|