People feel committed to other individuals, groups, organizations, or moral norms in many contexts of everyday life. Such social commitment can lead to positive outcomes, such as increased job satisfaction or relationship longevity; yet, there can also be detrimental effects to feeling committed. Recent high-profile cases of fraud or corruption in companies like Enron or Volkswagen are likely influenced by strong commitment to the organization or coworkers. Although social commitment might increase dishonest behavior, there is little systematic knowledge about when and how this may occur. In the present project, we reviewed 20,988 articles, focusing on studies that experimentally manipulated social commitment and measured dishonest behavior. We retained 445 effect sizes from 121 articles featuring a total of 91,683 participants across 33 countries. We found no evidence that social commitment increases or reduces dishonest behavior in general. Nonetheless, we did find evidence that the effect strongly depends on the target of the commitment. Feeling committed to other individuals or groups reduces honest behavior (g = -0.17 [-0.24, -0.11]), whereas feeling committed to honesty norms through honesty oaths or pledges increases honest behavior (g = 0.27 [0.19, 0.36]). The analysis identified several moderating variables and detected some degree of publication bias across effects. Our findings highlight the diverging effects of different forms of social commitment on dishonest behavior and suggest a combination of the different forms of commitment could be a possible means to combat corruption and dishonest behavior in the organizational context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

OBJECTIVE: This review seeks to deepen our understanding of the factors contributing to nursing students\' academic dishonesty and the repercussions of such behaviours on their learning in both classroom and clinical settings, and on the integrity of the nursing profession.
METHODS: It was a scoping review in which a five-stage methodological framework informed its process. Six databases were searched for relevant original studies. Other search methods were also conducted using Google Scholar, Trove, and ProQuest Dissertations for theses pertinent to the topic. An inductive descriptive approach was used to analyse and synthesise data.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies and nine doctoral theses were selected and included in the scoping review. Of these, 25 studies used a quantitative approach, nine studies a qualitative one, and two studies used mixed methods. Three categorical factors, intrapersonal, interpersonal, and external, contributed to nursing students\' academic dishonesty.
CONCLUSIONS: Academic dishonesty in nursing students is concerning. Noted factors contributing to academic dishonesty include stress and pressure experienced by students, the prevalence of peer cheating, and lack of knowledge. Most alarming is the significant correlation between academic dishonesty and clinical dishonesty. The evidence suggests that students who engage in dishonest behaviour in academic settings may be more likely to engage in dishonest behaviour in clinical settings. This raises serious concerns about integrity, ethics, patient safety and the reputation of nursing students, universities, healthcare providers and health professionals.

Hydrogen-rich water (HRW) has emerged as a novel approach in the field of health and wellness. It is believed to have therapeutic antioxidant properties that can neutralize harmful free radicals in the human body. It has also been shown to be beneficial in mitigating oxidative stress-induced damage through its anti-inflammatory and anti-apoptotic pathways. We aim to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water. The review protocol was uploaded on PROSPERO. After the initial search criteria, the articles were reviewed by two blinded investigators, and a total of 25 articles were included in the systematic review. The potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water on various aspects of health, including exercise capacity, physical endurance, liver function, cardiovascular disease, mental health, COVID-19, oxidative stress, and anti-aging research, are a subject of growing interest and ongoing research. Although preliminary results in clinical trials and studies are encouraging, further research with larger sample sizes and rigorous methodologies is needed to substantiate these findings. Current research needs to fully explain the mechanisms behind the potential benefits of hydrogen-rich water. Continued scientific exploration will provide valuable insights into the potential of hydrogen-rich water as an adjunctive therapeutic approach in the future.

Attackers are supposed to take advantage of producing deceptive actions in competitive ball sports, particularly in penalty situations. We conducted a scoping review of the experimental literature to scrutinize whether penalty takers do indeed benefit from using deceptive actions in penalty situations, especially by increasing the likelihood to score a goal. Studies using video-based and in-situ tasks in which soccer and handball goalkeepers try to save a penalty were evaluated. Results showed that penalty takers\' manipulation of spatial information available to the goalkeeper during deception (i.e., by using misleading and/or disguising actions) is less effective in in-situ than video-based studies. We argue that this difference occurs because goalkeepers adapt differently to the spatiotemporal constraints in the video-based and in-situ tasks. Goalkeepers appear to prioritize picking up spatial information in video-based tasks while prioritizing temporal information in-situ tasks. Therefore, the manipulation of spatial information appears to be less effective in the more representative in-situ studies than in video-based studies. In order to deceive, penalty takers are advised to manipulate temporal information during on-field penalty situations.

Informed consent and debriefing of research participants in studies that use deception are ethical safeguards for which existing scholarly work on their implementation remains variable and insufficiently clear. A systematic review of research ethics guidelines was conducted to sketch a picture of whether, why and how informed consent and debriefing are recommended when using deception. Documents roughly agreed on several general principles, but varied significantly in the specifics of why and whether these safeguards are necessary, in which conditions and how they should be implemented. Various aspects that appear in the literature could not be found in the guidelines. In our review, guidance was integrated and showed a variation of implementation strategies that could help in contextualizing these safeguards.

Several studies applying Machine Learning to deception detection have been published in the last decade. A rich and complex set of settings, approaches, theories, and results is now available. Therefore, one may find it difficult to identify trends, successful paths, gaps, and opportunities for contribution. The present literature review aims to provide the state of research regarding deception detection with Machine Learning. We followed the PRISMA protocol and retrieved 648 articles from ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, and Web of Science. 540 of them were screened (108 were duplicates). A final corpus of 81 documents has been summarized as mind maps. Metadata was extracted and has been encoded as Python dictionaries to support a statistical analysis scripted in Python programming language, and available as a collection of Jupyter Lab Notebooks in a GitHub repository. All are available as Jupyter Lab Notebooks. Neural Networks, Support Vector Machines, Random Forest, Decision Tree and K-nearest Neighbor are the five most explored techniques. The studies report a detection performance ranging from 51% to 100%, with 19 works reaching accuracy rate above 0.9. Monomodal, Bimodal, and Multimodal approaches were exploited and achieved various accuracy levels for detection. Bimodal and Multimodal approaches have become a trend over Monomodal ones, although there are high-performance examples of the latter. Studies that exploit language and linguistic features, 75% are dedicated to English. The findings include observations of the following: language and culture, emotional features, psychological traits, cognitive load, facial cues, complexity, performance, and Machine Learning topics. We also present a dataset benchmark. Main conclusions are that labeled datasets from real-life data are scarce. Also, there is still room for new approaches for deception detection with Machine Learning, especially if focused on languages and cultures other than English-based. Further research would greatly contribute by providing new labeled and multimodal datasets for deception detection, both for English and other languages.

Research participants are often deceived for methodological reasons. However, assessing the ethical acceptability of an individual study that uses deception is not straightforward. The academic literature is scattered on the subject and several aspects of the acceptability assessment are only scarcely addressed, which parallels reports of inconsistent ethics review. Therefore, we aimed to investigate where normative guidance documents agree and disagree about this assessment. A PRISMA-Ethics-guided systematic review of normative guidance documents that discuss deception of research participants was conducted. Our search strategy resulted in 55 documents that were subsequently analyzed through abductive thematic analysis. While guidance documents mention little about specific risks and opportunities of deception, our analysis describes a rich picture of the thresholds for acceptability of the risks and benefits of deception and their integration, the comparison with the risk-benefit analysis of alternative non-deceptive methods, and the bodies of people who are positioned to do the review. Our review reveals an agreement on the general process of assessing the acceptability of studies that use deception, although significant variability remains in the details and several topics are largely or completely unaddressed in guidance documents.

What types of honesty interventions have been tested and to what extent? We conducted a systematic literature review of single-element intervention studies designed to curtail individual-level dishonesty and classified the obtained interventions in a taxonomy that encompasses three frameworks: nudging, economic, and internal-reward. We find moral reminders that we classify as educative nudges as well as external commitments (pledges, oaths, honor codes) and priming that we classify under the internal-reward framework to be the most frequently studied interventions, whereas architectural nudges (defaults, sludge) have hardly been developed. Most importantly, we identify two areas for improvement essential for our collective ability to successfully translate and scale honesty interventions: a more thorough examination of the interventions\' underlying psychological processes and precise description of the experimental designs.

Compared with their neurotypical (NT) counterparts, persons with autism appear to be less inclined to tell lies and less skilled in delivering sophisticated forms of deception. At the same time, some forms of deception like white lies and prosocial lies are frequent in human interaction because they are important for social success. This article challenges the reader to evaluate the therapeutic potential for prosocial deception and teaching white-lie telling to autistic persons. The nature and development of antisocial and prosocial lying in NT development and autism are reviewed. Considerations for when to (and when not to) teach the skill of empathic lying are discussed and recommendations for how to teach the comprehension and production of prosocial lies are offered.

Although dishonesty is often a social phenomenon, it is primarily studied in individual settings. However, people frequently collaborate and engage in mutual dishonest acts. We report the first meta-analysis on collaborative dishonesty, analyzing 87,771 decisions (21 behavioral tasks; k = 123; nparticipants = 10,923). We provide an overview of all tasks used to measure collaborative dishonesty, and inform theory by conducting moderation analyses. Results reveal that collaborative dishonesty is higher (a) when financial incentives are high, (b) in lab than field studies, (c) when third parties experience no negative consequences, (d) in the absence of experimental deception, and (e) when groups consist of more males and (f) younger individuals. Further, in repeated interactions, group members\' behavior is correlated-participants lie more when their partners lie-and lying increases as the task progresses. These findings are in line with the justified ethicality theoretical perspective, suggesting prosocial concerns increase collaborative dishonesty, whereas honest-image concerns attenuate it. We discuss how findings inform theory, setting an agenda for future research on the collaborative roots of dishonesty. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).