Reactions to various degrees of deceit in a mixed-motive relationship

Investigated reactions to being informationally dependent upon a person who has reason to misrepresent the facts. Ss were 46 male and 44 female undergraduates. A 2-person, 2-choice, mixed-motive experimental game provided a setting in which an S was dependent upon another as a source of information about an external state which indicated consequences deserved by each of them. Feedback relative to the accuracy of the other's statements was mutually costly and was provided only if S doubted the other's statements. In separate experimental treatments the other lied 0, 25, 50, or 75%. Results indicate that the rate of doubting of the Ss (1) was higher at 25% than at 0% and higher at either 50 or 75% than at 25%; (2) decreased over trials when there was no deception, remained essentially unchanged at 25 and 50%, and increased at 75%; and (3) was higher for initially suspicious Ss than for initially trusting ones, the most dramatic difference occurring when the other lied only occasionally (25%). There was no main effect of sex with respect to doubting behavior, but questionnaire data indicated that females felt less comfortable in the information-dependence role and were less satisfied with the relationship established during the interaction.