Truth, Equivocation Concealment, and Lies in Job Applications and Doctor-Patient Communication

Abstract

Our concern was to explore two institutional contexts in which telling the truth, equivocating, and lying could each carry costs: applicants not getting a job and doctors coping with distressed patients. For the job interviews, applicants could be truthful, lie, or equivocate about personal qualities specified as necessary in the job description. The chances of detection were varied. The bias was toward truth telling, but in one condition, its incidence dropped to 52%. Lying and equivocation/concealment were preferred equally. For the medical scenarios, stories were varied to match Bok's suggestions about conditions that could encourage doctors not to be truthful. Truth telling was preferred universally. Lying was seen as wrong, as was equivocation. Within these constraints, however, the variances across kinds of patient and outcome were associated with Bok's expectations.