From a legal perspective, dishonesty is the idea of cost-benefit analysis. When people think about being dishonest, they wonder what can be gained or what can be lost. If the cost of lying is too high, they are not going to be dishonest.
People often feel the need to rationalize their dishonesty. The danger is taking that first step.
The story of Joe Papp, an Olympic cyclist falls into this category. Papp consulted his physician, who wrote Papp a prescription for erythropoietin (EPO), a cancer treatment that increases the production of red blood cells. Papp injected himself, but also imported and distributed EPO to his team and to other teams. This essentially made him a drug dealer.
People that are required to put their signature at the top of a document instead of the bottom are more likely to provide truthful information.
They are confirming that the information they’re about to provide is true before they have a chance to falsify it.
The IKEA effect: how we value the fruits of our labour over instant gratification