Maybe Raj Rajaratnam should have blamed his desk instead of challenging government wiretaps.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan on Monday upheld the former hedge fund manager's 2011 conviction for conspiracy and securities fraud. He argued, unsuccessfully, that Federal Bureau of Investigation agents misled a judge in getting approval to listen in on his phone calls.

A better argument would have been that his desk made him do it.

He reportedly had a giant, curvilinear desk with a dozen massive computer screens arrayed on top. From what I've just learned, there's a good chance it simply possessed him like a demon from hell.

A soon-to-be-published academic study shows that big desks and big chairs can cause people to feel more powerful, and when they feel more powerful, they are more likely to cheat and steal. The study also shows that people who drive vehicles with big seats are more likely to commit traffic offenses.

Now, you may be asking, kind of crackpots did a study like this?

Well, I'm here to tell you that these are folks who could impress any federal judge or jury. They are researchers from America's leading business schools at Columbia University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, Northwestern University and the University of California, Berkeley.

Their study is titled "The Ergonomics of Dishonesty: The Effect of Incidental Posture on Stealing, Cheating and Traffic Violations." It is slated to be published in a forthcoming issue of the journal Psychological Science.

"We were amazed at what we found," said Andy Yap in a telephone interview. He is a visiting professor at MIT's Sloan School of Management and started this research while studying at Columbia Business School.

"We knew the link between power and cheating was clear from the literature," he said. "We didn't expect posture to have such a strong effect."

The idea that power corrupts is more than just a cliche. Yap's paper cites research that demonstrates a direct correlation. To argue against it is to ignore history and human nature.

"Power is like nuclear energy," Yap said. "It can be used for good. But it can also be dangerous and used for evil."

Additionally, the idea that the movement or position of the physical body affects they way people feel, think and behave has been explored since at least the days of Charles Darwin. Yap and his colleagues show that people can succumb to bad impulses in an environment that lets one spread out like an alpha-male gorilla raising his arms in the air.

"Although we may pay very little attention to ordinary and seemingly innocuous shifts in our bodily posture, these subtle postural shifts can have tremendous impact on our thoughts, feelings and behavior," the study's authors explained.

Their conclusions come from three lab tests and one field study they conducted. One lab test showed people in "expansive postures" were more like to cheat on a test. Another showed they were more like to steal from overpayments than they were intentionally given as part of the experiment.

Another test deployed a driving-simulation video game that incentivized players to drive dangerously fast. Guess who was most likely to skip out on a "hit and run?" The ones in the fat seats.

The field study sent researchers out counting all the illegally parked cars on New York City streets. Vehicles with the biggest seats were the most likely offenders.

Study subjects often reported feelings of power just for being able to stretch out and expand their posture in their environment.

"When you feel more powerful, you are more willing to take risks," Yap explained. "If they hang a carrot in front you, you might do whatever it takes to get that carrot, even if it's unethical."

Maybe companies should seat their biggest executives in smaller chairs. "In corporate America, size is power," Yap said. "As you climb the corporate ladder, you get bigger offices. You get bigger chairs."

Maybe Rajaratnam should have told the court, "I'm sorry, your honor. I had too big of a desk. I had too big of a chair. I knew I should have purchased something more modest from Ikea."

I asked Yap how he thought this argument would have gone for Rajaratnam. His reply: "Thank goodness he doesn't know about this research yet."
