We find that competitive incentives do increase cheating, even when compared to non-competitive incentives that are uncertain. Interestingly, competition seems NOT to make cheating more prevalent: About the same number of people cheat. But may make it stronger: Those who cheat, may cheat more. 3/3

When incentives are competitive, they are also uncertain. This matters because being unsure about whether you’ll be paid might itself affect people’s tendency to cheat. But most past studies did not disentangle the effects of competition and uncertainty. This is what we do in this paper. 2/3

Thank you Susanne, this is helpful!

Thanks! I am less interested in papers suggesting failure was due to some theoretical moderator, and more interested in papers suggesting original stimuli aren't good anymore to test original effect (e.g., old products that aren't popular anymore, attribute levels that have become unrealistic, etc.)

75% is the threshold for Certified Fresh at Rotten Tomatoes--there must be a lot of actual decisions flipping in that range, but that's an effect of a categorical boundary (vs. sheer probability that a reviewer likes the movie)