In relationships, small financial deceptions are surprisingly common. A recent study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (T Wirga et al., 2022) reveals the extent to which collectors also hide their spending from their partners, with striking differences in how men and women employ deception strategies.
The Research
Table of Contents
Researchers surveyed 120 individuals who regularly spent money on collecting activities, such as model-making. The research examined not only whether collectors were honest about their spending but also the specific techniques they used to conceal costs from their partners. The research was conducted in Poland, with participants recruited from Polish collector clubs, gatherings, and other local events. The authors were affiliated with the University of Opole in Opole, Poland.
Both male and female collectors systematically concealed their expenses from their partners. However, the scale and methods of deception differed significantly between genders.
Men’s Deception Patterns
Male collectors spent substantially more than women and were less likely to reduce these expenditures. On average, men underreported their collecting expenses by approximately 30 percent. However, the percentage of concealment varied with spending levels. Men spending between $50 and $500 USD per month underreported by approximately 15 percent, whereas those spending over $501 USD underreported by approximately 38 percent.
Notably, men who spent more than $1,150 USD monthly stopped informing their partners about additional purchases altogether, suggesting potentially addictive collecting behavior.
Women’s Deception Patterns
Women exhibited a different pattern. They underreported their collecting expenses by approximately 45 percent on average, a figure significantly higher than that for men. However, women employed a distinct strategy: rather than lowering costs by a specific amount, 23 percent of female collectors used a ceiling approach, telling their partners they “didn’t spend more than” a specified amount (typically about $100).
Deception Strategies
Men and women also used different techniques to disguise spending.
Men’s Preventive Approach
Men predominantly used what researchers termed “preventive techniques.” They informed their partners of purchases but systematically reduced the reported costs by claiming that items were exchanged, received as gifts, purchased at below-cost prices, or obtained through barter.
One particularly inventive example: a collector would pay a seller a partial payment in advance, then return with his wife and pay the remaining amount publicly, so she believed the total cost was less.
Women’s Denial Strategy
Women more commonly employed “denying techniques,” avoiding disclosure entirely. When purchases were discovered, women would claim that the item had been purchased long ago, borrowed from someone, or had been in their possession but hidden. This approach reflects an attempt to avoid conflict by preventing the discussion from occurring in the first place.
The Role of Income
The study found that income level significantly affected collecting behavior. Collectors earning above the national average (approximately $2,500 USD per month) spent approximately 40 percent of their monthly income on collecting, whereas those earning below the average spent approximately 28 percent. Crucially, however, both groups devoted roughly the same proportion of their income toward collecting, suggesting that collectors spend as much as they can afford rather than maintaining fixed budgets.
Partners Know They’re Being Deceived
In a particularly noteworthy finding, the research indicated that partners of collectors are generally aware they’re being deceived about spending levels. Despite collectors’ elaborate schemes, which included requesting partial invoices, having parcels delivered to relatives’ addresses, or using code words with delivery personnel, their partners typically recognized the deception.
This creates what researchers described as a “double game”: One person lies with their partner’s tacit awareness, and the partner allows the deception to continue despite knowing about it.
Why Do Collectors Lie?
Collectors rationalized their deception by claiming their partners didn’t understand their passion for acquiring. This lack of perceived understanding served as a justification for dishonesty, suggesting that greater acceptance or tolerance of collecting might reduce such behavior.
Deception Essential Reads
Gender Differences
The researchers propose several explanations for gender differences in deception strategies. Women may employ denial strategies because they often prioritize avoiding conflict and maintaining partnership harmony. By not disclosing purchases, they attempt to prevent disagreements entirely.
Men, conversely, may use preventive disclosure because they expect their partners to notice new items anyway. By proactively mentioning purchases (albeit with falsified costs), they appear transparent while still concealing true expenses. This approach may also reflect stereotypical beliefs that women are more observant of details, making complete concealment impractical.
The finding that men stop reporting purchases entirely above certain thresholds suggests a different calculation: Once costs reach a certain level, deception through partial disclosure becomes untenable, and complete concealment becomes the only option.
Implications
This research illuminates a common yet rarely discussed aspect of relationship dynamics. The systematic nature of deception across both genders, combined with partners’ awareness of being deceived, suggests that collecting-related dishonesty represents a tacit compromise in many relationships rather than simple betrayal.
The research highlights how gender stereotypes and relationship dynamics intersect with consumer behavior. The different deception strategies employed by men and women reflect broader patterns in how they approach conflict, disclosure, and partnership.
It should be noted that this study was done in Poland and may not reflect collectors worldwide. Additionally, shopping was included as a collecting habit and was not specified, such as art, clothing, etc. More clarification in this regard would be ideal.
In spite of these potential limitations, the authors summarized their work brilliantly: “Collectors of all genders do not tell the truth about their collecting expenses to their partners. They also lower the declared amounts for collecting. Men and women differ in the techniques of hiding their expenses, but they hide them in an equally creative way.”
Related reading