Coevolution of role preference and fairness in the ultimatum game

Abstract Social value orientation (SVO) characterizes stable individual differences by an inherent sense of fairness in outcome allocations. Using the event-related potential (ERP), this study investigated differences in fairness decision-making behavior and neural bases between individuals with prosocial and proself orientations using the Ultimatum Game (UG). Behavioral results indicated that prosocials were more prone to rejecting unfair offers with stronger negative emotional reactions compared with proselfs. ERP results revealed that prosocials showed a larger P2 when receiving fair offers than unfair ones in a very early processing stage, whereas such effect was absent in proselfs. In later processing stages, although both groups were sensitive to fairness as reflected by an enhanced medial frontal negativity (MFN) for unfair offers and a larger P3 for fair offers, prosocials exhibited a stronger fairness effect on these ERP components relative to proselfs. Furthermore, the fairness effect on the MFN mediated the SVO effect on rejecting unfair offers. Findings regarding emotional experiences, behavioral patterns, and ERPs provide compelling evidence that SVO modulates fairness processing in social decision-making, whereas differences in neural responses to unfair vs. fair offers as evidenced by the MFN appear to play important roles in the SVO effect on behavioral responses to unfairness.

Download Full-text

Reviewing Stranger on the Internet: The Role of Identifiability through “Reputation” in Online Decision Making

Future Internet ◽

10.3390/fi13050110 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (5) ◽

pp. 110

Author(s):

Mirko Duradoni ◽

Stefania Collodi ◽

Serena Coppolino Perfumi ◽

Andrea Guazzini

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Ultimatum Game ◽

The Internet ◽

Self Disclosure ◽

Quantitative Evidence ◽

Web Technologies ◽

Social Acts ◽

Good Reputation ◽

The Stranger

The stranger on the Internet effect has been studied in relation to self-disclosure. Nonetheless, quantitative evidence about how people mentally represent and perceive strangers online is still missing. Given the dynamic development of web technologies, quantifying how much strangers can be considered suitable for pro-social acts such as self-disclosure appears fundamental for a whole series of phenomena ranging from privacy protection to fake news spreading. Using a modified and online version of the Ultimatum Game (UG), we quantified the mental representation of the stranger on the Internet effect and tested if people modify their behaviors according to the interactors’ identifiability (i.e., reputation). A total of 444 adolescents took part in a 2 × 2 design experiment where reputation was set active or not for the two traditional UG tasks. We discovered that, when matched with strangers, people donate the same amount of money as if the other has a good reputation. Moreover, reputation significantly affected the donation size, the acceptance rate and the feedback decision making as well.

Download Full-text

Comparing mind perception in strategic exchanges: human-agent negotiation, dictator and ultimatum games

Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces ◽

10.1007/s12193-020-00356-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Minha Lee ◽

Gale Lucas ◽

Jonathan Gratch

Keyword(s):

Ultimatum Game ◽

Dictator Game ◽

Two Dimensions ◽

Moral Standing ◽

Social Actors ◽

Ultimatum Games ◽

Mind Perception ◽

Cognitive Aptitude ◽

Negotiation Agents ◽

Emotional Capacity

AbstractRecent research shows that how we respond to other social actors depends on what sort of mind we ascribe to them. In a comparative manner, we observed how perceived minds of agents shape people’s behavior in the dictator game, ultimatum game, and negotiation against artificial agents. To do so, we varied agents’ minds on two dimensions of the mind perception theory: agency (cognitive aptitude) and patiency (affective aptitude) via descriptions and dialogs. In our first study, agents with emotional capacity garnered more allocations in the dictator game, but in the ultimatum game, agents’ described agency and affective capacity, both led to greater offers. In the second study on negotiation, agents ascribed with low-agency traits earned more points than those with high-agency traits, though the negotiation tactic was the same for all agents. Although patiency did not impact game points, participants sent more happy and surprise emojis and emotionally valenced messages to agents that demonstrated emotional capacity during negotiations. Further, our exploratory analyses indicate that people related only to agents with perceived affective aptitude across all games. Both perceived agency and affective capacity contributed to moral standing after dictator and ultimatum games. But after negotiations, only agents with perceived affective capacity were granted moral standing. Manipulating mind dimensions of machines has differing effects on how people react to them in dictator and ultimatum games, compared to a more complex economic exchange like negotiation. We discuss these results, which show that agents are perceived not only as social actors, but as intentional actors through negotiations, in contrast with simple economic games.

Download Full-text

On the value of participation: endogenous emergence of social norms in a three-player ultimatum game experiment

International Review of Economics ◽

10.1007/s12232-007-0036-z ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 55 (1-2) ◽

pp. 127-147 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Gianluca Grimalda ◽

Anirban Kar ◽

Eugenio Proto

Keyword(s):

Social Norms ◽

Ultimatum Game

Download Full-text