Describe the different options for cheating discussed. How does the item influence the cheater? one paragraph , it should be at least 100 words
This is the video , if u want to see it
There are two comments for my classmates. I want you to reply on them by 50 words
The First comment from Megan Reese
The TedTalk presentation that we viewed in class was very interesting, giving a perspective and analysis of cheating far more scientific than typical assumptions associated with the deceptive act. Irrational behavior of cheating and stealing can occur in various outlets, but the platforms discussed in this talk were of the stock market economy and monitored cheating in an experimental setting. It is common knowledge that cheating is a bad thing and it goes against moral standards. Despite this understanding, there are not simply a couple people who cheat a lot, it was found that lots of people cheat a little bit. Based on the findings explained in the TedTalk, the item that is being stolen or used as the object of fraudulence influences behavior. There are moral feeling associated with an object. If the item of interest is a seemingly valueless token, people are more likely to cheat versus a scenario where the item is money. Another item that causes people to feel guilty about cheating is in a situation regarding religion, such as a test on the 10 Commandments. There is a “personal fudge factor” involved in cheating and so long as one’s personal view is not diminished, they justify cheating slightly. Similarly, if a know cheater is representing a specific group, there will be a sociological impact on the level of cheating amongst the remaining individuals. If the cheater is part of the in-group, the group is more apt to cheat, but if the cheater is outside of their social circle cheating will decrease. People justify their actions when cheating becomes a norm of their social organization. When people are reminded of the morality regarding a decision, they are less likely to cheat.
The second comment from Jemel Kate Adaya
In class, we watched a TED Talk video where a man named Dan Ariely, a behavioral economist, discussed the hidden reasons why we think it’s okay to cheat or steal. Firstly, I think the speaker was credible because of his background studies in economics and his appearance. He did a very good job of using his experience as the hook and imbedded “irrationality” and “cheating” into the story. To test his proposition and answer questions about cheating, Ariely created different experiments with or without different incentives added. He even tempted people to cheat by asking them to shred their paper and then tell how many they got right. He found that cheating was still there but only a little bit. First, he concludes that cheating must be a “cost-benefit analysis” or follow economic rational theory. A person decides whether it’s worth it to cheat. However, he found this analysis to be wrong. As they increased the incentives from 1 dollar to 5 dollars to 10 dollars, less people cheated but only cheated just by little bit. So Ariely ended up concluding that maybe cheating is a measuring tool. We can cheat a little but not too much that it hurts our credibility. He called this “personal fudge factor.” For example, when asked to list the ten commandments nobody wanted to cheat because of the honor code. All in all, you can also conclude that maybe cheating is affected by the subject and the item/incentive. With that said, I found that people use cheating as a type of measuring tool to be particularly interesting.