[thaumasiotes]

I assume that in this particular case, it's a joke referring to the subject of the study, which involved similar, if even weaker, assurances.

In general, this kind of thing is oddly common. It's all over government forms. I just interviewed with a Chinese father who wanted me to spend time with his children providing exposure to English. He asked me whether I had a criminal record.

I don't, but if I did, and I chose to lie about it, random Chinese parents would never know the difference. (Though entering China might have been a challenge.) Why ask?

[gwd]

> I don't, but if I did, and I chose to lie about it, random Chinese parents would never know the difference. (Though entering China might have been a challenge.) Why ask?

I think you'd be surprised how many people are really bad at lying; or even bad at acting normal when they think they have something to hide, particularly when asked such a question unexpectedly. Sure, some people with a criminal record may be able to lie plausibly when put on the spot, but there are a reasonable number who would give themselves away even if denying it. No real cost, some benefit, so why not ask?

[thaumasiotes]

Well, I sanitized my report of the interview. He actually asked if I had a bad history. I was confused and said I didn't understand. He clarified that he was asking about things like crime.

So the element of getting suddenly put on the spot doesn't really apply. That's already about as awkward as communication gets.

More importantly, though, I don't think the point is correct to begin with. This is fine:

> I think you'd be surprised how many people are really bad at lying; or even bad at acting normal when they think they have something to hide, particularly when asked such a question unexpectedly.

But job applicants with criminal records are only going to match this description once or twice. For the rest of their lives, it's not going to be an unexpected question, and they'll have lots of practice in denying their record if that's the way they choose to go. You're just never going to catch anyone out this way.

[gwd]

> But job applicants with criminal records are only going to match this description once or twice. For the rest of their lives, it's not going to be an unexpected question, and they'll have lots of practice in denying their record if that's the way they choose to go. You're just never going to catch anyone out this way.

You're right, you're only going to catch people out if you're the only one asking this kind of question... but right now that's more or less true of the people in your story. First-mover advantage. :-)

[woah]

Why do forms require signatures if it's easy to forge (especially if you are submitting it electronically), and evidence of the agreement is gathered from other sources if it comes up in court?

Because it boils down what could have started as a nebulous mix of halfway-unethical actions into a single fraudulent act that can be pointed to and punished later, and will provide a lot of people with the impetus to back out of the fraud once they see themselves about to commit an unambiguously illegal act.

[triceratops]

Can't they run a background check? It's common to check a tenant out when renting a property.

[thaumasiotes]

Maybe, but engaging an American company to run a background check on an American would represent a significant commitment for the typical Chinese person. It's not a realistic idea.

[triceratops]

More than hiring an American person to tutor their children?