Death anxiety and dishonesty

Study 1 There were 402 adults (221 females) recruited from a professional data collection company (https://www.wjx.cn/). Participants have received remuneration from the company for their participation. Measures include: (1) death anxiety. 9 items selected from the Scale of death anxiety (Cai, Tang, Wu, & Li, 2017b). Each item describes a feeling or perception an individual may have when thinking of their own death and dying, for example, "In the last month, whenever thinking of death, I have often felt scared." Participants were asked to answer how much they agreed with each item on a 7-point scale according to the facts (1 = not at all, 7 = very much). (2) dishonesty. 12 items selected from the Self-Reported Inappropriate Negotiation Strategies (SINS) Scale (Lu, Lee, Gino, & Galinsky, 2018; Robinson, Lewicki, & Donahue, 2000). Each item describes a dishonest tactic that could be used in a negotiation, for example, "Pretend to be disgusted at an opponent's comments". Participants were asked to imagine that they are engaging in a negotiation, which is very important to them and their business, and indicate the extent to which they think each tactic is appropriate to be used in such situation on a 7-point scale (1 = not at all appropriate, 7 = very appropriate). Study 2 Participants were 158 students recruited from a university in China. They received 10 yuan (Chinese currency) for their involvements. We employed a one factor ( self-benefited vs. other-benefited) between-subjects design. Procedure: Stage 1: participants reported their demographic information and then completed the measurement of death anxiety online. Stage2: After a week, participants were asked to complete the rest questionnaires of the study. Measures: (1) death anxiety. The death anxiety was measured by the Scale of death anxiety (Cai, Tang, Wu, & Li, 2017b), 17 items. Participants were asked to answer how much they agreed with each item on a 5-point scale according to the facts (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). (2) self- vs. other-benefited dishonesty. The dishonesty propensity was measured by the same 12 items used in Study 1. Participants in the self-benefited condition were asked to imagine that they are engaging in a negotiation, which is very important to them and their business. In contrast, in the other-benefited condition, participants were asked to imagine that they are helping one of their friends to engage a negotiation, which is very important to the friend and the friend's business. Participants were instructed to rate the extent to which they think each dishonest tactic is appropriate to be used by them in such situation (or to help the friend) on a 7-point scale (1 = not at all appropriate, 7 = very appropriate).