In response, Jason reached out to a blogger on BGG who wrote about cheating in board games a few years ago, Dr. Corey Butler, professor of social psychology at Southwest Minnesota State University. What drives people to cheat? The Psychology of Affairs: Inside the Mind of the Wayward Spouse. Now that we got out of the way, I wanted to peek into the minds of wayward spouses and really look at the depth of flawed thinking involved. I have created a male character that I will refer to as “Dick Devious” and he represents an amalgam of several different actual cheating men.
- The Psychology Of Games: Priming, Consistency, Cheating, and Being a Jerk. Jamie Madigan, examines the overlap of psychology and video games at psychologyofgames.com.
- In book: The small and big deceptions: in psychology and evolutionary sciences perspective (pp.97-118). Individuals with a high level of this tendency cheat in games and in life.
- Cheating in MP games is a rather simple break down. People already feel like they are being cheated out of wins or it is unfair that X can do Y even if it was a valid in game play. A lot of these people will resort to cheating as justification and revenge on those that they already feel have done them wrong.
- I suppose what I want is a 'The Anthropology of Cheating' video. As referenced in the video, cheating only gets a serious spotlight when done in multiplayer situations, so focusing on individual psychology seems like a loss of perspective. Many of us are raised in constant comparison of others.
- David Ley, in the article 'Why Are Women Cheating More?,' which appeared in the May 19, 2010 issue of 'Psychology Today,' says that female marital infidelity appears to be in the midst of a progressive increase 2 3. Nearly half of all married women are expected to cheat at some point during their lifetime, according to Ley.
ENGN Episode 146 – Psych Chat: The Psychology of Cheating in Board Games with Dr. Corey Butler
Now you may recall (if you are one of my nearly half a dozen faithful readers), I discussed The Psychology of Cheating on this very blog exactly one year ago this month. Tempus Fugit, am I right? At that time I examined some polling data and argued that cheating was probably not very common and thus not much to worry about. Let's take a look at the graph I referenced:
See, most people don't cheat much, so it's not a problem, right? And why would anyone lie in an anonymous survey? Case closed, or so I thought. Then I read Dan Ariely's carefully researched and well written book, The Honest Truth About Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone-- Especially Ourselves. Now I'm not so optimistic.
Ariely conducted a series of clever lab experiments in which he manipulated the opportunity to cheat. The participants in these studies solved matrix puzzles for real money, and some participants were allowed to score their own tests in such a way that they wouldn't get caught if they took advantage of the situation. So the question is, will people cheat under these conditions? Ariely found that cheating is extremely common, that most people cheat a little, but that extreme transgressions are relatively rare. So people take a little more money than they earned, but most of them didn't come close to the maximum they could have taken. It's important to point out that people are doing a balancing act here. They want the benefits of cheating, but they don't want to think of themselves as cheaters. That's why they 'round up' a little bit in their favor but they don't loot the bank. That would be wrong!
For what it's worth, the graph presented above may indicate the prevalence of extreme, blatant cheating, but it almost certainly underestimates the rate of minor cheating. In a board game, these would be small transgressions, such as maybe not paying the right price for something or doing something out of turn. We may not even be fully conscious of our behavior or aware that it could qualify as cheating. To give an example from the podcast, I might make a small error that gives me an advantage in the game. Would I go out of my way to correct the mistake if I later noticed what I had done, or would I let it slide? And would I be more motivated to correct an error that harmed me rather than benefited me? Any asymmetry between these two scenarios could be considered evidence of cheating by omission.
But it's just a game. Unlike Ariely’s experiments, people don't typically win money when they play board games. Yet it still feels good to win, bad to lose, and terrible to come in last place, so the temptation and the possibility of cheating (just a little bit) are still there. Any time we play a game, self esteem and social status are potentially on the line, and these are huge motivations for all of us.
Shortly after I read Ariely’s book, I had the opportunity to join a four player game of Azul. I have to admit that as I watched everyone add their points from their tiles, I had a moment of doubt. Were they doing the math right? Were they fudging their scores a little? Perhaps games should be designed so that all scoring is publicly verified. Unfortunately this would slow many games down, so it’s obviously a tradeoff. What’s a game designer to do? If Ariely is right, make the scoring public so that no one is tempted.
Another approach would be to police the other players, or at least maintain some awareness. As Jason suggested in the podcast, if players (especially younger ones) are lacking in moral development, then it is important to (humanely) correct their behavior so the cheating habit doesn’t escalate. This approach is more about controlling bad apples than simply assuming that everyone is a potential cheater, as Ariely does. It’s a good idea, though our typical introverted board gamer might not want to deal with confrontations about cheating too often.
Clearly, this is not the final word on the topic of cheating, so listen to the podcast, tell us what you think in the comments, and watch for further conversations on the psychology of board games.
People who cheat at social games are cheaters in real life too. So says a survey by casual game maker PopCap Games.
The survey looked at the habits of more than 1,200 adult consumers. Of those who admit cheating, the stats are telling. About 48 percent of them admit to cheating in real life as well. Of those who say they don’t cheat in social games, only 14 percent said they cheated in real life on everything from stealing hotel towels to cheating on taxes. That means people who cheat in social games are 3.5 times more likely to be dishonest in real life, compared to those who don’t cheat in social games.
The data shows that about 118 million people regularly play social games in the U.S. and the U.K., and about 55 percent of the players are women. About 11 percent of those who play social games in the U.K. admit to cheating, while 7 percent of U.S. players say they cheat. The survey said that men are more likely to cheat in social games than women (54 percent to 46 percent). And 72 percent of the cheaters are under the age of 40.
The report was conducted by the Information Solutions Group for PopCap. Of those who admit to cheating, 53 percent said they cheat on tests at school. U.K. cheaters are more likely to cheat on their taxes than U.S. cheaters (58 percent versus 33 percent). About 51 percent of people who cheat at social games park in handicap spaces or steal towels, cups or other items from hotels (compared to just 14 percent of those who said they don’t cheat at social games). About 49 percent of the cheaters also cheated on a committed relationship; 47 percent reported stealing packets of sugar, butter or jam from a restaurant; and 43 percent said they steal magazines from waiting rooms.
“How we behave in virtual space and interact with others in social games often mirrors how we act in the real world,” said Clay Routledge, professor of psychology at North Dakota State University. “With more than 100 million people playing social games regularly, we can expect to see the full range of psychological characteristics represented in the social gaming population – even cheating.”
Psychology Of Cheating In Games To Play
The survey polled members of Toluna’s Internet ePanel in the United States and United Kingdom between September 15 and September 22, 2011. Of the 1,201 respondents, 801 (67%) were from the U.S., while 400 (33%) were from the U.K.
[Image credit:Lions Den]
VentureBeat
VentureBeat's mission is to be a digital townsquare for technical decision makers to gain knowledge about transformative technology and transact. Our site delivers essential information on data technologies and strategies to guide you as you lead your organizations. We invite you to become a member of our community, to access:- up-to-date information on the subjects of interest to you,
- our newsletters
- gated thought-leader content and discounted access to our prized events, such as Transform
- networking features, and more.
