The Impact of Imitation on Deceptive Behavior and the Mediating Mechanism

Fang Jinru; Geng Xiaowei

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250609

PDF(1901 KB)

Journal of Psychological Science ›› 2025, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (6) : 1394-1407. DOI: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250609

General Psychology, Experimental Psychology & Ergonomics

The Impact of Imitation on Deceptive Behavior and the Mediating Mechanism

Fang Jinru¹, Geng Xiaowei²

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Imitation serves as a crucial mechanism for the transmission of human culture and is central to individual moral development. Conventional imitation refers to the more accurate imitation by which individuals learn the normative behaviors of the group through imitation. Instrumental learning refers to the less accurate imitation by which individuals learn the technical behavior of the group through imitation. These two forms of imitation exert different effects on cognitive strategies and behavioral outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of conventional imitation and instrumental imitation on deceptive behavior, with particular attention to the mediating role of moral idealism. The hypotheses are as follows: individuals exhibit significantly lower levels of deceptive behavior under conventional imitation conditions compared to instrumental imitation(H1); conventional imitation significantly enhances individual moral idealism relative to instrumental imitation(H2a); and moral idealism plays a mediating role in conventional imitation reducing deceptive behavior(H2b).
We conducted three experiments to test these hypotheses. In Experiment 1, a total of 129 participants were randomly assigned to either conventional or instrumental imitation conditions. Participants were primed with instructional language and videos of making a necklace. In conventional imitation, the instructional language emphasized "we have always done it this way", with synchronized and consistent demonstrator actions. In contrast, instrumental imitation highlighted "see how he/she does it", with the demonstrators' actions not synchronized or consistent. Deceptive behavior was subsequently measured using a mental math task. An independent-samples t-test revealed that participants in the conventional imitation condition exhibited lower rates of cheating and plagiarism.
In Experiment 2a, a total of 168 undergraduate students were randomly assigned to three different conditions (i.e., conventional imitation, instrumental imitation, and control condition). Participants in the conventional imitation and instrumental imitation conditions were primed similarly to Experiment 1, while those in the control condition only made necklaces without additional priming. Moral idealism was assessed using the Idealism Scale from the Ethics Position Questionnaire, and deceptive behavior was measured using a Fault Finding Task. One-way ANOVA results showed that participants in the conventional imitation condition demonstrated significantly lower levels of deceptive behavior and higher levels of moral idealism compared to the other conditions. There was no significant difference between the instrumental imitation condition and the control condition. A three-step regression analysis confirmed that moral idealism partially mediated the effect of conventional imitation on reducing deception.
In Experiment 2b, a total of 131 undergraduates were randomly assigned to two different conditions, moral idealism and control condition. Participants in the moral idealism condition were primed by unscrambling sentences (e.g., the scrambled sentence “Moral standards” “ judging oneself” “green plants” “and others” “apply to” may be recomposed as “Moral standards apply to judging oneself and others”). In control conditions, participants completed common sense-based sentences (e.g., “1. The sun, 2. High-rise buildings, 3. All revolve around, 4. The nine major planets, 5. Motion”). It can be recomposed as, “The nine major planets all revolve around the sun motion.”They then completed different finding tasks. Independent-samples t-tests showed that participants in the moral idealism condition exhibited less cheating behavior than those in the control condition, suggesting that moral idealism can effectively reduce cheating behavior.
In summary, the research found that conventional imitation reduces deceptive behavior, moral idealism played a mediating role, whereas instrumental imitation does not affect deceptive behavior. These findings contribute to our understanding of imitation behavior and moral decision making, and also provide some guidance for moral education.

Key words

conventional imitation / instrumental imitation / deception behavior / moral idealism

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

Fang Jinru, Geng Xiaowei. The Impact of Imitation on Deceptive Behavior and the Mediating Mechanism[J]. Journal of Psychological Science. 2025, 48(6): 1394-1407 https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20250609

References

[1] 邓小平, 徐晨, 程懋伟, 张向葵. (2017). 青少年偏差行为的同伴选择和影响效应:基于纵向社会网络的元分析. 心理科学进展, 25(11), 1898-1909.
[2] 范伟, 任梦梦, 肖俊泽, 简增郸, 杜晓明, 傅小兰. (2019). 羞耻情绪对欺骗行为的影响: 自我控制的作用. 心理学报, 51(9), 992-1006.
[3] 方杰, 温忠麟, 张敏强. (2017). 类别变量的中介效应分析. 心理科学, 40(2), 471-477.
[4] 耿晓伟, 房津如, 韩彦芳, 李中权, 赵蜜, 杨烨. (2019). 道德相对主义和厌恶情绪对道德直觉判断的影响. 心理学报, 51(4), 517-526.
[5] 肖玲, 王静. (2023). 班杜拉观察学习理论视域下家庭暴力对儿童攻击性行为的影响研究. 教育观察, 12(3), 18-20.
[6] Alsaad A., Saif-Alyousfi A. Y. H., & Elrehail H. (2020). Religiosity, idealism, and ethical consumption: The mediating effect of perceived customer effectiveness and moral obligation. Journal of Social Marketing, 11(1), 25-43.
[7] Chowdhury, R. M. M. I. (2018). Religious orientations and consumer ethics: The mediating role of personal moral philosophies. Journal of Macromarketing, 38(3), 315-330.
[8] Chuang, P. J., & Chiu, S. F. (2016). When moral personality and moral ideology meet ethical leadership: A three-way interaction model. Ethics and Behavior, 28(1), 45-69.
[9] Clegg, J. M., & Legare, C. H. (2016). Instrumental and conventional interpretations of behavior are associated with distinct outcomes in early childhood. Child Development, 87(2), 527-542.
[10] Clegg, J. M., & Legare, C. H. (2017). Parents scaffold flexible imitation during early childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 153, 1-14.
[11] Davis M. A., Andersen M. G., & Curtis M. B. (2001). Measuring ethical ideology in business ethics: A critical analysis of the ethics position questionnaire. Journal of Business Ethics, 32(1), 35-53.
[12] Decrop, R., & Docherty, M. (2024). Chronicle of deceit: Navigating the developmental cognitive landscape from childhood fabrications to prolific adulthood artistry. Developmental Review, 74, Article 101165.
[13] DePaulo B. M., Lindsay J. J., Malone B. E., Muhlenbruck L., Charlton K., & Cooper H. (2003). Cues to deception. Psychological Bulletin, 129(1), 74-118.
[14] Engarhos P., Shohoudi A., Crossman A., & Talwar V. (2019). Learning through observing: Effects of modeling truth- and lie-telling on children' s honesty. Developmental Science, 23(1), Article e12883.
[15] Fan W., Huang Z. J., Jian Z. D., & Zhong Y. P. (2022). The effects of ritual and self-control resources depletion on deceptive behavior: Evidence from behavioral and ERPs studies. Psychophysiology, 60(4), Article e14210.
[16] Fan W., Ren M., Zhang W., Xiao P., & Zhong Y. (2020). Higher self-control, less deception: The effect of self-control on deception behaviors. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 16(3), 228-241.
[17] Fischer, R., & Karl, J. (2021). Predicting behavioral intentions to prevent or mitigate covid-19: A cross-cultural meta-analysis of attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control effects. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 264-276.
[18] Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(1), 175-184.
[19] Forsyth D. R., O'Boyle E. H., & McDaniel M. A. (2008). East meets west: A meta-analytic investigation of cultural variations in idealism and relativism. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 813-833.
[20] Gino, F., & Ariely, D. (2012). The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 445-459.
[21] Hays, C., & Carver, L. J. (2014). Follow the liar: The effects of adult lies on children' s honesty. Developmental Science, 17(6), 977-983.
[22] Hobson N. M., Schroeder J., Risen J. L., Xygalatas D., & Inzlicht M. (2017). The psychology of rituals: An integrative review and process-based framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(3), 260-284.
[23] Hoehl S., Keupp S., Schleihauf H., Mcguigan N., Buttelmann D., & Whiten A. (2019). 'Over-imitation': A review and appraisal of a decade of research. Developmental Review, 51, 90-108.
[24] Hofmans, L., & Bos, W. V. D. (2022). Social learning across adolescence: A Bayesian neurocognitive perspective. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 58, Article 101151.
[25] Hyemin H., Jeongmin K., Changwoo J., & Cohen G. L. (2017). Attainable and relevant moral exemplars are more effective than extraordinary exemplars in promoting voluntary service engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 283.
[26] Jordan J., Mullen E., & Murnighan J. K. (2011). Striving for the moral self: The effects of recalling past moral actions on future moral behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5), 701-713.
[27] Kenward, B. (2012). Over-imitating preschoolers believe unnecessary actions are normative and enforce their performance by a third party. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112(2), 195-207.
[28] Lavoie J., Leduc K., Crossman A. M., & Talwar V. (2016). Do as I say and not as I think: Parent socialisation of lie-telling eehavior. Children and Society, 30(4), 253-264.
[29] Legare, C. H., & Nielsen, M. (2015). Imitation and innovation: The dual engines of cultural learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(11), 688-699.
[30] Legare C. H., Wen N. J., Herrmann P. A., & Whitehouse H. (2015). Imitative flexibility and the development of cultural learning. Cognition, 142, 351-361.
[31] Nicol, A. A. M., & Rounding, K. (2018). Can ethical ideologies predict prejudice? Ethics and Behavior, 28(8), 662-679.
[32] O'Boyle, E. H., & Forsyth, D. R. (2021). Individual differences in ethics positions: The EPQ-5. PLoS ONE, 16(6), Article e0251989.
[33] Powell, L. J. (2022). Adopted utility calculus: Origins of a concept of social affiliation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(5), 1215-1233.
[34] Rai, T. S., & Holyoak, K. J. (2013). Exposure to moral relativism compromises moral behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 995-1001.
[35] Reddish P., Fischer R., & Bulbulia J. (2013). Let' s dance together: Synchrony, shared intentionality, and cooperation. PLoS ONE, 8(8), Article e71182.
[36] Rossano, M. J. (2012). The essential role of ritual in the transmission and reinforcement of social norms. Psychological Bulletin, 138(3), 529-549.
[37] Roza E. C. A., Lucieer I. C., Bongardt D. V. D., Luijk M. P. C. M., & Kok R. (2024). Parental lying to children: A systematic review. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 16(4), 804-833.
[38] Schleihauf, H., & Hoehl, S. (2020). A dual-process perspective on over-imitation. Developmental Review, 55, Article 100896.
[39] Schoemann A. M., Boulton A. J., & Short S. D. (2017). Determining power and sample size for simple and complex mediation models. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 379-386.
[40] Talwar, V., & Crossman, A. (2022). Liar, liar…sometimes: Understanding social-environmental influences on the development of lying. Current Opinion in Psychology, 47, Article 101374.
[41] Tian A. D., Schroeder J., Häubl G., Risen J. L., Norton M. I., & Gino F. (2018). Enacting rituals to improve self-control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(6), 851-876.
[42] Vives M. L., Cikara M., & Feldmanhall O. (2021). Following your group or your morals? The in-group promotes immoral behavior while the out-group buffers against it. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 139-149.
[43] Xygalatas D., Mitkidis P., Fischer R., Reddish P., Skewes J., Geertz A. W., Roepstorff A., & Bulbulia J. (2013). Extreme rituals promote prosociality. Psychological Science: A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 24(8), 1602-1605.
[44] Zaikauskait L., Grzybek A., Mumford R. E., & Tsivrikos D. (2023). The theory of planned behaviour doesn't reveal 'attitude-behaviour' gap? Contrasting the effects of moral norms vs. idealism and relativism in predicting pro-environmental behaviours. PLoS ONE, 18(11), Article e0290818.
[45] Zlobina, A., & Dávila, M. C. (2022). Preventive behaviours during the pandemic: The role of collective rituals, emotional synchrony, social norms and moral obligation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 61(4), 1332-1350.