The fact that little research has been conducted on the penalties for violating communication rules precipitated this study exploring the consequences of a superior lying to a subordinate and of a subordinate lying to a superior. The subjects were 82 college students who filled out attribution scales regarding the superior and subordinate depicted in a script. The scripts were manipulated so that the subordinate lied to the superior in half the situations and the superior lied to the subordinate in the other half. The results showed that either type of lie (by subordinate or superior) was found to reduce a subject's trust in, and solidarity with the liar. As predicted, the penalties for lying were more pronounced when the superior lied; that is, the deceptive boss was judged more severely than was the deceptive subordinate. Who lied seemed to make less difference in assessments of the victim, however. A positive relation between trust and solidarity was found, though this correlation was slightly lower than the one found in a previous study. (RL)