{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027153558052434457, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0018726591760299626, 'mean_word_length': 5.288235294117647, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Justifications as a Threat to Honesty

People often face tempting situations in which they can secure profit in dishonest ways. Here we survey a variety of justification processes that free people to engage in dishonesty. We distinguish two main categories: (1) self-serving justifications, in which one justifies one’s actions by processing information in a self-benefiting way; and (2) socially motivated justifications, in which one justifies unethical acts by reference to an additional, socially beneficial factor. We close with a discussion of the ethical hazard of corrupt collaboration (i.e., joint unethical acts). Corrupt collaboration is a major challenge to institutions and societies as it places individuals in a dilemma: collaborate with peers or follow ethical rules of conduct. Recent work suggests that in such situations, people prefer collaboration over honesty. We discuss the dynamics of corrupt collaboration, the ways in which these toxic relationships emerge and spread, and how we can curb such behavior and encourage honest, ethical conduct.