Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.121> Article
Research Article

Moral Disengagement, Social Deduction Game Playing and Deceptive Tendencies: Examine Their Associations

Mingzhe Xu*
New Oriental Academy

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Social deduction games include rule-based deception, hidden roles and strategic guesses about other players. But little is known about whether playing these games is linked to people's lying habits and moral traits in real life. This one-time survey studied connections between social deduction game engagement and self-reported lying tendency, lie acceptability and moral disengagement among 128 participants with such game experience. Game engagement was tested by a combined index covering gameplay frequency and perceived lying-related content. Social deduction game engagement has no clear link with people's daily lying tendency. But higher game engagement is connected with a higher level of moral disengagement. These findings show that deception-based game play relates more closely to moral-cognitive justification processes than to daily lying habits themselves. The results support a situational view of game deception: players may distinguish rule-allowed bluffing from real-life dishonesty. Future studies should use larger and more representative samples and explore mechanisms between game exposure and real-life behavior.

Keywords: Social deduction games; lying tendency; deception; moral disengagement; moral integrity
Published: September 15, 2026
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2026.36780
Volume: CHR Vol.121
pp. 8-20
Download PDF

References

  1. Gervais, J., et al. (2000). Children's persistent lying, gender differences, and disruptive behaviours: A longitudinal perspective.International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24(2), 213-221.
  2. Zhou, W., et al. (2024). The LYin lying tendency scale: Capturing individual differences in selfish, altruistic, and social-acceptance lying tendencies.Current Psychology, 43(28), 1-21.
  3. Bussey, K., Fitzpatrick, S., & Raman, A. (2015). The role of moral disengagement and self-efficacy in cyberbullying.Journal of School Violence, 14(1), 30-46.
  4. Bandura, A. (1996). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities.International Journal of Psychology, 31(3-4), 27-34.
  5. Bandura, A., Caprara, G.-V., & Zsolnai, L. (2000). Corporate transgressions through moral disengagement.Journal of Human Values, 6(1), 57-64.
  6. Mazzone, A., & Camodeca, M. (2019). Bullying and moral disengagement in early adolescence: Do personality and family functioning matter?Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(8), 2120-2130.
  7. Bandura, A., et al. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364.
  8. Anderson, C. A., et al. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: A meta-analytic review.Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151.
  9. Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2019). Violent video game engagement is not associated with adolescents' aggressive behaviour: Evidence from a registered report.Royal Society Open Science, 6(2), 171474.
  10. Apperley, T. H. (2006). Genre and game studies: Toward a critical approach to video game genres.Simulation & Gaming, 37(1), 6-23.
  11. Zheng, Z., et al. (2026). The Stackelberg speaker: Optimizing persuasive communication in social deduction games.Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers).
  12. Barnett, J., & Coulson, M. (2010). Virtually real: A psychological perspective on massively multiplayer online games.Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 167-179.
  13. Austin, H. J., & Sloan, R. J. S. (2022). Through the shanzhai lens: Reframing the transmedial copying and remaking of games.British Journal of Chinese Studies, 12(2), 133–153.
  14. DePaulo, B. M., et al. (1996). Lying in everyday life.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 979–995.
  15. Cantarero, K., & Szarota, P. (2017). When is a lie more of a lie? Moral judgment mediates the relationship between perceived benefits of others and lie-labeling.Polish Psychological Bulletin, 2, 315–325.
  16. Bok, S. (2011).Lying: Moral choice in public and private life. Vintage.
  17. DePaulo, B. M., & Bond, C. (2011). Deceiving and detecting deceit.
  18. Ford, C. V., King, B. H., & Hollender, M. H. (1988). Lies and liars: Psychiatric aspects of prevarication.The American Journal of Psychiatry, 145(5), 554–562.
  19. Lewis, M., & Saarni, C. (Eds.). (1993).Lying and deception in everyday life. Guilford Press.
  20. Serota, K. B., Levine, T. R., & Boster, F. J. (2010). The prevalence of lying in America: Three studies of self-reported lies.Human Communication Research, 36(1), 2-25.
  21. Oliveira, C. M., & Levine, T. R. (2008). Lie acceptability: A construct and measure.Communication Research Reports, 25(4), 282-288.
  22. Šukys, S. (2013). Athletes' justification of cheating in sport: Relationship with moral disengagement in sport and personal factors.Baltic Journal of Sport and Health Sciences, 3(90).
  23. Trepte, S., Reinecke, L., & Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: How playing online computer games creates online and offline social support.Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 832-839.
  24. Sparrow, L. A., Gibbs, M., & Arnold, M. (2021). Ludic ethics: The ethical negotiations of players in online multiplayer games.Games and Culture, 16(6), 719-742.
  25. Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan.Motivation and Emotion, 18(2), 129–166.
  26. Jasielska, D., et al. (2021). General trust scale: Validation in cross-cultural settings.Current Psychology, 40(10), 5019–5029.
  27. Rosenberg, M. (1956). Misanthropy and political ideology.American Sociological Review, 21(6), 690–695.