Social Ties and Money Priming in Bargaining Games and the Prisoner‘s Dilemma

The authors examine the effects of money priming and solidarity on individual behavior in three simple games: dictator, ultimatum, and prisoner's dilemma game. In three consecutive experiments, they use two different money treatments and two neutral (control) treatments. Additionally, they vary the strength of social ties between participants by conducting experiments with students from a military university and a regular university. Although the priming procedure is sufficient to remind people of the concept of money, it is not sufficient to induce systematically different behavior of the treatment groups compared to the control groups. They find significant differences between groups with strong and weak social ties, even without activating the idea of group affiliation. They discuss various explanations of why the results seem to contradict previous research on money priming.

On College Students' impulsive consumption psychology——the influence of trait power and money priming

Two experiments were conducted to explore the effects of trait power and money priming on College Students' impulse buying. In both experiments, Sense of Power Scale (SPS) was used to select subjects with high and low trait power to participate in the experiment; in Experiment 1, scrambled-words task was used to activate the concept of money; in Experiment 2, the method of mindset priming was used to activate the amount of money. The results show that: (1) After the concept of money is activated, individuals with low trait power have higher impulse purchase intention than those with high trait power, regardless of whether they are rich or poor; however, there is no significant difference between high and low power groups in no money concept priming group. (2) No matter whether the level of individual's trait power is high or low, compared with the condition of lack of money, individuals have higher impulse purchase intention under the condition of money abundance.

Does Subjective SES Moderate the Effect of Money Priming on Socioeconomic System Support? A Replication of Schuler and Wänke (2016)

Findings that money priming increases socioeconomic system support have proven difficult to replicate. Schuler and Wänke found that subjective socioeconomic status (SES) moderates money priming effects on system justification and belief in a just world. We conducted three preregistered replications of this research, with sample sizes 3 times those of the original studies. Replication 1 was a conceptual replication that combined elements from the original two studies, and Replications 2 and 3 were close replications of Studies 1 and 2, respectively. None of the four subjective SES × Money Prime interaction effects tested were statistically significant, and only one of the four survived a “small telescopes” analysis. We discuss reasons for our general failure to replicate the original findings and implications for money priming effects.

Does money change political views? – An investigation of money priming and the preference for right-wing politics

In a multistudy approach across seven studies we explored whether, as suggested by previous research, money primes affect people’s political orientation. Across the studies we used different dependent variables and samples, and we combined the results in a small-scale meta-analysis to test two competing hypotheses. Independent of the measures and experimental setting, our findings did not indicate that money primes lead to stronger right-wing orientations (main-effect hypothesis). However, we obtained a marginally significant interaction effect suggesting that the money priming effect is moderated by subjective socioeconomic status (moderation hypothesis). These findings suggest that, contrary to previous research, the money priming effect on political orientation is at best small and dependent on one’s subjective socioeconomic status. Implications for money priming research and political psychology are discussed.