Reader's Digest Virtue Test

Remove all ads!

Although this isn't a recent study (2001), perhaps you'll find the following "survey" as interesting as I always have.

I'm going to give a brief summary of this test. Reader's Digest dropped large numbers of wallets filled with pictures, cash, credit cards, and more importantly, a means with which to return them including names and phone numbers in cities spread throughout different countries. Each country earned a score based on the number of wallets returned. If you'd like to read the complete article, it can be found here.

The percentages are as follows:

Denmark - 100%
Norway - 100%
Singapore - 90%
Australia - 70%
Japan - 70%
US - 67%
UK - 65%
Holland - 50%
Germany - 45%
Russia - 43%
Philippines - 40%
Italy - 35%
China - 30%
Mexico - 21%

I feel that the countries earning 90% and greater truly have something to be proud of.

What's your reaction to this? Do you believe that surveys such as these, despite their inherent randomness, can be accurate in portraying a country's common morality in general? Please elaborate.

 

Form the article:

And still they score 45%?

Wondered why China, Russia, Philippines and Mexico are low on the list? Because they are poor countries, duh.
Do you call it a good test of *kuch* honesty *kuch* when you drop 50 dollars in one country, where it is a years income and 50 dollars in another country where it's peanuts?
Following this test, we can assume that nobody in Africa is honest, they will probably even answer "no" for "yes" and "yes" for "no", because none of the wallets will ever return.

[ April 04, 2005, 13:34: Message edited by: Morgoth ]

 

hehe yeah Seriously, I'm surprised we [philippines] got as high as 40%. They must have dropped them in our trendier malls. And mothers or something musta picked them. :/

 

@Morgoth: It's not 'Math Digest.'

They've done this for different cities in America -- not even Salt Lake City gets 100%.

 

I don't think the test is fair, they could be dropped the wallets into crime hotspots in the countries that scored lower and richer cities in Denmark, Norway etc for the higher scores.

As for the UK, its stupid as England, Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland have different lifestyles, so its unfair to lump them into one catagory.

 

I agree with Cesard. To truly account for the virtuosity of any nation, you would have to drop the same number of wallets in both poor and rich cities. I would believe that would change the outcome of the "test." And what does it matter anyway, does this mean if you lose your wallet in Norway, you have a hundred percent chance of getting it back? To be completely accurate, you would have to drop one wallet for every person in that country where only the one person could find it, then see how many are returned. I would be surprised if more than half were sent back, but maybe that's because I am a cynical american.

 

Hey, of course this test is not to be taken too seriously. They dropped the purse, they counted, that's it. It is not like Moody's ratings would depend on this.

And in contrast to what Morgoth said:

That's probably why those who look like they could use $50 are poor whereas the others are affluent.

 

I'm not rich (at all), but I'd return the wallet. Would the money be enticing? Certainly. But I couldn't live with myself afterward.

 

One would think that in richer districts, the percentage of wallets returned should be higher. But here's from the article:

However, this may be different for rich and poor countries. Incidentally, the highest scoring are among the richest countries. Doesn't mean the low-scoring countries are all poor.

Speculating about the fairness of the test is difficult. $50 is different money in China than in Sweden, but it's also different for tin scavengers and smartly dressed people. Next, it still isn't certain if increasing the monetary worth will increase the temptation. There are people who would return $50 but would keep $5000 because the gain would be so much greater. Then there are those who would keep $50 but wouldn't keep $5000 because it would hurt someone else too much.

Next important thing is that the wallets dropped in Mexico or China could have looked like fat rich Westerners' wallets. Not like this makes it morally proper, but people in third world countries tend to blame fat rich Westerners for all their economic problems (and they aren't as wrong as we would like them to be) and they might have been thinking that for them it was months gain while spare change for the owner.

 

They talked about Canada in the article, but they never gave a percentage. I remember my dad lost his wallet about four years ago, and almost two years after that a man returned it saying he had found it while working under a bridge near our house. It was ruined by the weather, but still had everything that was in it when he lost it. It made me feel good to be a human at that time, knowing the extent someone would go, years later to return the wallet. There was a news story a while back of someone who lost their wallet something like 60 years ago, and recently had it returned. If I find the article I'll post a link.

Found the link: Second last article.

[ April 05, 2005, 21:39: Message edited by: reepnorp ]

 

What I want to know is how many of the wallets were returned without the cash. I've had my wallet returned by mail before but no cash was in it. The note that I found inside said that the person had seen somebody pick it up empty it and drop it in a nearby garbage can then leave. The good samaritan retrieved the wallet and shipped it to me, according to the return information I have in my wallet.

edit:
This is probably what happened to the missing wallets in Germany.