Alle Publikationen
- <<
- <
- 1
2019
-
(2019): Anthropomorphization of artificial agents leads to fair and strategic, but not altruistic behavior. In: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 122, S. 168-173. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.09.008
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.09.008 Abstract: With robots playing an increasing role in our daily lives, our emotional responses to them have become an active subject of study. The process of anthropomorphization, ascribing human affordances to non-human objects, is thought to play a large role in human-robot interaction. However, earlier studies have relied largely on experimenter’s manipulation of anthropomorphism, and the use of virtual robots. The aim of this study was to investigate peopleâs fairness preference and strategic and altruistic behavior toward different opponents (a human, a semi-humanoid and a spider-like robot, and a laptop) in two economic games. Anthropomorphization questionnaires and mood measures were also administered. Our findings suggest that fairness preference and strategic behavior are not predicted by the opponent’s physical appearance, but instead predicted by individual differences in the tendency to anthropomorphize others. Altruistic behavior, on the other hand, is affected by the opponent’s physical appearance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
2017
-
(2017): Altruistic behavior in cohesive social groups. The role of target identifiability. In: PLoS one 12 (11). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187903
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29161282 Abstract: People's tendency to be more generous toward identifiable victims than toward unidentifiable or statistical victims is known as the Identifiable Victim Effect. Recent research has called the generality of this effect into question, showing that in cross-national contexts, identifiability mostly affects willingness to help victims of one's own "in-group." Furthermore, in inter-group conflict situations, identifiability increased generosity toward a member of the adversary group, but decreased generosity toward a member of one's own group. In the present research we examine the role of group-cohesiveness as an underlying factor accounting for these divergent findings. In particular, we examined novel groups generated in the lab, using the minimal group paradigm, as well as natural groups of students in regular exercise sections. Allocation decisions in dictator games revealed that a group's cohesiveness affects generosity toward in-group and out-group recipients differently, depending on their identifiability. In particular, in cohesive groups the identification of an in-group recipient decreased, rather than increased generosity.
-
(2017): Harm to self outweighs benefit to others in moral decision making. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114 (30), S. 7963-7968. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1706693114
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706693114 Abstract: How we make decisions that have direct consequences for ourselves and others forms the moral foundation of our society. Whereas economic theory contends that humans aim at maximizing their own gains, recent seminal psychological work suggests that our behavior is instead hyperaltruistic: We are more willing to sacrifice gains to spare others from harm than to spare ourselves from harm. To investigate how such egoistic and hyperaltruistic tendencies influence moral decision making, we investigated trade-off decisions combining monetary rewards and painful electric shocks, administered to the participants themselves or an anonymous other. Whereas we replicated the notion of hyperaltruism (i.e., the willingness to forego reward to spare others from harm), we observed strongly egoistic tendencies in participants' unwillingness to harm themselves for others' benefit. The moral principle guiding intersubject trade-off decision making observed in our study is best described as egoistically biased altruism, with important implications for our understanding of economic and social interactions in our society.
Keywords: Altruism, Death and Dying, Decision Making, entscheiden, Gesellschaft, Moral, Social Cognition 2016
-
(2016): Gene-culture interaction and the evolution of the human sense of fairness. In: Scientific reports 6. DOI: 10.1038/srep32483
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27562008 Abstract: How Darwinian evolution would produce creatures with the proclivity of Darwinian generosity, most of them voluntarily giving up the immediate benefit for themselves or their genes, remains a puzzle. This study targets a problem, the origin of human sense of fairness, and uses fairness-related genes and the social manipulation of Darwinian generosity as the key variables underlying the human sense of fairness, inequity aversion, as well as their relationships within cooperation, and the anticipation foresight of the way relationships are affected by resource division, given the assumption of randomly matched partners. Here we suggest a model in which phenotype will gradually converge towards the perfect sense of fairness along with the prospect of cooperation. Later, the sense of fairness will decrease but it is never extinct. Where social manipulation of Darwinian generosity overshadows genetics, the sense of fairness could be acute to the degree of social manipulation. Above all, there still exists a threshold in the degree of social manipulation, beyond which altruism dominates selfishness in human cooperation. Finally, we propose three new directions toward more realistic scenarios stimulated by recent development of the synergy between statistical physics, network science and evolutionary game theory.
-
(2016): Third-party punishment. Altruistic and anti-social behaviours in in-group and out-group settings. In: Journal of Cognitive Psychology 28 (4), S. 486-495. DOI: 10.1080/20445911.2016.1138961
Abstract: Explored the decision-making process involved in third-party punishment (TPP) within an economic frame, using the TPP game. Specifically, altruistic punishment (i.e., the behavior of spending one's own money, with no personal gain, to punish those who violate the norms of cooperation) was investigated. This behavior was analyzed in an ingroup and outgroup game setting to compare how individuals behave with members of their own group (ingroup) and with members of another group (outgroup). In particular, groups were defined on a real nationality basis (Chinese or Italian). Results showed altruistic punishment behavior in both experimental groups, and this tendency emerged as more prominent when faced with unfair play towards a member of one's own group. Furthermore, both groups exhibited a propensity for antisocial punishment behavior: Many participants spent small amounts of money to punish fair behavior, regardless of national group membership. zitiert von 5
-
(2016): Intuition and Moral Decision-Making - The Effect of Time Pressure and Cognitive Load on Moral Judgment and Altruistic Behavior. In: PLoS one 11 (10). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164012 Abstract: Do individuals intuitively favor certain moral actions over others? This study explores the role of intuitive thinking-induced by time pressure and cognitive load-in moral judgment and behavior. We conduct experiments in three different countries (Sweden, Austria, and the United States) involving over 1,400 subjects. All subjects responded to four trolley type dilemmas and four dictator games involving different charitable causes. Decisions were made under time pressure/time delay or while experiencing cognitive load or control. Overall we find converging evidence that intuitive states do not influence moral decisions. Neither time-pressure nor cognitive load had any effect on moral judgments or altruistic behavior. Thus we find no supporting evidence for the claim that intuitive moral judgments and dictator game giving differ from more reflectively taken decisions. Across all samples and decision tasks men were more likely to make utilitarian moral judgments and act selfishly compared to women, providing further evidence that there are robust gender differences in moral decision-making. However, there were no significant interactions between gender and the treatment manipulations of intuitive versus reflective decision-making. zitiert von 19
2015
-
(2015): Coordination, Collaboration and Cooperation. In: Interaction Studies 16 (3), S. 383-418. DOI: 10.1075/is.16.3.03ami
Abstract: Reviews the literature on the evolution and development of human cooperation, emphasizing important aspects of intercultural variation in collaborative and cooperative behavior. Humans have attained an unparalleled level of sophistication when engaging in collaborative and cooperative activities. Remarkably, the skills and motivation to engage in complex forms of collaboration and cooperation seem to emerge early on during infancy and childhood. The authors confront the different evolutionary scenarios in which cooperation may have emerged and provide the reader with a first orientation in the abundant literature on human cooperation. zitiert von 4
-
(2015): The evolution and development of human cooperation. In: Interaction Studies 16 (3), S. 383-418
Abstract: Reviews the literature on the evolution and development of human cooperation, emphasizing important aspects of intercultural variation in collaborative and cooperative behavior. Humans have attained an unparalleled level of sophistication when engaging in collaborative and cooperative activities. Remarkably, the skills and motivation to engage in complex forms of collaboration and cooperation seem to emerge early on during infancy and childhood. The authors confront the different evolutionary scenarios in which cooperation may have emerged and provide the reader with a first orientation in the abundant literature on human cooperation.
-
(2015): "Our" food versus "my" food. Investigating the relation between childhood shared food practices and adult prosocial behavior in Belgium. In: Appetite 84, S. 54-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.09.022
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25265154 Abstract: This study focuses on the connection between prosocial behavior, defined as acting in ways that benefit others, and shared meals, defined as meals that consist of food(s) shared with others. In contrast to individual meals, where consumers eat their own food and perhaps take a sample of someone else's dish as a taste, shared meals are essentially about sharing all the food with all individuals. Consequently, these meals create situations where consumers are confronted with issues of fairness and respect. One should not be greedy and consume most of a dish; instead, rules of polite food sharing need to be obeyed. It is therefore proposed that those who have often engaged in shared meals during childhood will have a more prosocial personality, as compared to those who less often took part in shared meals during childhood. To test this hypothesis, data about frequency of shared meals during childhood and altruistic personality in early adulthood were collected using a cross-sectional survey in Belgium (n = 487). Results confirm that higher levels of shared meal consumption correspond to higher scores on the self-report altruism scale among students.
Keywords: Adolescent, Adult, Altruism, Belgium, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Eating, Einfluss von ästhetischer Vorprägung/Erziehung, Entwicklungspsychologie, Erwartungen, Fairness, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Meals, Nahrungswissenschaft?, Personality, Self Report, Students, Surveys and Questionnaires, Vergangenheit / Erziehung, Young Adult -
(2015): Fairness - A multidimensional approach. Kumulative Dissertation. Universität Bonn, Bonn. Online verfügbar unter http://hss.ulb.uni-bonn.de/2015/4168/4168.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 01.03.2018
Abstract: In this cumulative dissertation - in addition to an overview about psychological and economic theories on fair behavior - four contributions are presented investigating fairness with different neuroscientific methods and using different paradigms. - (1) Strang, S., Gross, J., Schuhmann, T., Riedl, A., Weber, B., & Sack, A. (2014). Be nice if you have to - The neurobiological roots of strategic fairness. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsu114 Titel anhand dieser DOI in Citavi-Projekt übernehmen. (2) Strang, S., Utikal, V., Fischbacher, U., Weber, B., & Falk, A. (2014). Neural correlates of receiving an apology and active forgiveness: An fMRI study. PLoS One, e87654. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087654 Titel anhand dieser DOI in Citavi-Projekt übernehmen. (3) Hu, Y., Strang, S., & Weber, B. (2015). Helping of punishing strangers: Neural correlates of altruistic decisions as third-party and of its relation to empathic concern. Frontiers of Behavioral Neuroscience, 9:24. DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00024 Titel anhand dieser DOI in Citavi-Projekt übernehmen. (4) Strang, S., Grote, X., Kuss, K., Park, S. Q., & Weber, B. (2015, in preparation). Generalized negative reciprocity - How to interrupt the chain of unfairness.
2012
-
(2012): Justice and Conflicts. Theoretical and Empirical Contributions. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
Abstract: Explained the complex construct of moral courage. Moral courage is defined as courageous behavior accompanied by anger and indignation which intends to enforce societal and ethical norms without regard to one's own social costs. It is the risk of negative social consequences that distinguishes moral courage from other forms of prosocial behavior. Similarities and differences between moral courage, heroism, and social control are discussed. Determinants promoting or inhibiting morally courageous behavior include situational factors and particular personality traits including justice sensitivity, empathy, high self-assurance, and open-mindedness. The presence or absence of others has been found to be a particularly significant determinant of helping behavior but not morally courageous behavior. Training programs designed to promote moral courage are outlined. In summary, moral courage is an important concept and should be promoted within society. zitiert von: 59
-
(2012): Empathy, prosocial behavior, and other aspects of kindness, S. 168-179
Abstract: This chapter deals with a multitude of dispositional variables, all interconnected by virtue of their focus on the benefit of others. We refer to them as the network of kindness. Baldwin and Baldwin (1970, p. 30) defined kindness as 'a motivation that is sometimes inferred from the fact that one person benefits another, provided the circumstances are appropriate.' Thus, kindness involves both the prosocial acts and the underlying motivations. This leads to an important distinction between empathy and prosocial behavior. Empathy is an other-oriented tendency to comprehend and share the (in most definitions, emotional) states of others. Sympathy and compassion that involve concern for others are related constructs (Eisenberg et al., 1999). Prosocial behavior is voluntary behavior (e.g., volunteering, sharing personal resources, providing instrumental help, and supporting others emotionally in times of distress) enacted with the intent of benefiting others (e.g., Eisenberg, Fabes, &c Spinrad, 2006). The distinctions and relationships among components of the network of kindness (e.g., altruism and prosocial behavior) have yielded very rich discussions in the literature that are beyond the scope of this chapter. In some cases prosocial behavior involves generosity, a behavior intended to benefit others beyond normative standards of giving, and sometimes it involves altruism, a behavior intended to benefit others at expense to the self.' It is virtually impossible to measure reliably prosocial behaviors that are purely altruistic because even the sense of doing good can be rewarding to the self (Andreoni, 1990). Therefore, prosocial behavior is often measured without strong evidence for the underlying motivation behind it (Eisenberg et al., 1999). Importantly, evolutionary reasoning (de Waal, 2008) and social-psychological research (Batson, 2009; Hoffman, 1988; Van Lange, 2008) both suggest that empathy may in many cases provide the underlying motivation for behaving prosocially. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved) zitiert von 12
2010
-
(2010): Altruism and fairness. Unnatural selection?. In: Comptes rendus biologies 333 (2), S. 174-180. DOI: 10.1016/j.crvi.2009.12.005
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20338534 Abstract: Darwin admitted that the evolution of moral phenomena such as altruism and fairness, which are usually in opposition to the maximization of individual reproductive success, was not easily accounted for by natural selection. Later, authors have proposed additional mechanisms, including kin selection, inclusive fitness, and reciprocal altruism. In the present work, we explore the extent to which sexual selection has played a role in the appearance of human moral traits. It has been suggested that because certain moral virtues, including altruism and kindness, are sexually attractive, their evolution could have been shaped by the process of sexual selection. Our review suggests that although it is possible that sexual selection played such a role, it is difficult to determine the extent of its relevance, the specific form of this influence, and its interplay with other evolutionary mechanisms.
2005
-
(2005): Evolution of indirect reciprocity. In: Nature 437 (7063), S. 1291-1298. DOI: 10.1038/nature04131
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16251955 Abstract: Natural selection is conventionally assumed to favour the strong and selfish who maximize their own resources at the expense of others. But many biological systems, and especially human societies, are organized around altruistic, cooperative interactions. How can natural selection promote unselfish behaviour? Various mechanisms have been proposed, and a rich analysis of indirect reciprocity has recently emerged: I help you and somebody else helps me. The evolution of cooperation by indirect reciprocity leads to reputation building, morality judgement and complex social interactions with ever-increasing cognitive demands.
Keywords: Altruism, Biological Evolution, Biologie, Cooperative Behavior, Evolutionsbiologie, Genese von Normen, Good manners, Humans, Indirekte Reziprozität, Kooperation, Models, Biological, Morals, Natur & Genese von Normen, Normen, Observablen/Kriterien für sozial angemessenes Verhalten und dessen Bewertung, Reziprozität, Soziale Angemessenheit, Trust, Voraussetzungen für sozial angemessenes Verhalten 2004
-
(2004): Why be nice? Psychological constraints on the evolution of cooperation. In: Trends in cognitive sciences 8 (2), S. 60-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.003
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15588809 Abstract: Animals often aid others without gaining any immediate benefits. Although these acts seem to reduce the donor's fitness, they are only apparently altruistic. Donors typically help because they or their kin receive future benefits or avoid costly punishment. Reciprocal altruism--alternating the roles of donor and recipient--has been a well-studied form of cooperation among non-kin because of its intuitive appeal in explaining human cooperation. Despite immense theoretical interest, little empirical evidence substantiates the biological importance of reciprocal altruism in non-human animals. We propose that this is because psychological mechanisms constrain its application in cooperative contexts. In particular, we contend that cognitive limitations such as temporal discounting, numerical discrimination and memory make reciprocity difficult for animals.
Keywords: Altruism, Animals, Biologie, Cooperative Behavior, Evolutionsbiologie, Game Theory, Genese, Good manners, Höflichkeit, Humans, Interaktion, Kooperation, Natur & Genese von Normen, Normen, Observablen/Kriterien für sozial angemessenes Verhalten und dessen Bewertung, Problem Solving, reziproker Altruismus, Reziprozität, Social Behavior, Soziale Angemessenheit, Voraussetzungen für sozial angemessenes Verhalten 2003
-
(2003): Signaling goodness. Social rules and public choice. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press (Economics, cognition, and society). Online verfügbar unter http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.17724
DOI: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3998/mpub.17724 Abstract: Charity and evolution -- Charity and reciprocity -- Political charity -- Political positions and imitative behavior -- Goodness -- Activism -- A study of political positions -- The growth of government -- Environmental policy Political, intellectual, and academic discourse in the United States has been awash in political correctness, which has itself been berated and defended -- yet little understood. As a corrective, Nelson and Greene look at a more general process: adopting political positions to enhance one's reputation for trustworthiness both to others and to oneself. Phillip Nelson and Kenneth Greene are Professors of Economics in the Department of Economics at the State University of New York, Binghamton
Keywords: Altruism, Charities, Political sociology, Public interest, Social Norms, Social Perception -
(2003): Respect for group members: Intragroup determinants of collective identification and group-serving behavior. In: Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (2), S. 183-193. DOI: 10.1177/0146167202239043
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202239043 Abstract: This experiment examined how (disrespectful vs. respectful) treatment and (negative vs. positive) performance evaluation, both received from the same fellow group members, affects collective identification and willingness to engage in group-serving behavior. It was predicted and found that respectful as opposed to disrespectful intragroup treatment increased collective identification and willingness to engage in group-serving behavior in the immediate group situation, irrespective of whether intragroup evaluation was positive or negative. There was also evidence of a mediating role of collective identification. Regression analyses based on the measurement of perceived intragroup treatment and perceived intragroup evaluation as continuous variables corroborated these findings but also pointed to limits of the positive effects of respectful intragroup treatment. Finally, the interrelation of treatment and evaluation by fellow group members as two possible components of intragroup respect are discussed as well as the political dimension of research on intragroup respect.
Keywords: Adult, Altruism, Attitude, Cooperative Behavior, Female, Group Processes, Humans, Male, Social Behavior, Social Identification 2000
-
(2000): Strong reciprocity and human sociality. In: Journal of theoretical biology 206 (2), S. 169-179. DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.2000.2111
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10966755 Abstract: Human groups maintain a high level of sociality despite a low level of relatedness among group members. This paper reviews the evidence for an empirically identifiable form of prosocial behavior in humans, which we call "strong reciprocity", that may in part explain human sociality. A strong reciprocator is predisposed to cooperate with others and punish non-cooperators, even when this behavior cannot be justified in terms of extended kinship or reciprocal altruism. We present a simple model, stylized but plausible, of the evolutionary emergence of strong reciprocity.
Keywords: Altruism, Biological Evolution, Cooperative Behavior, Evolutionsbiologie, Favoriten, Good manners, Humans, Interaktion, Kooperation, Models, Biological, Observablen/Kriterien für sozial angemessenes Verhalten und dessen Bewertung, Reziprozität, Soziale Angemessenheit, Starke Reziprozität, Strong reciprocity model 1998
-
(1998): Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. In: Nature 393 (6685), S. 573-577. DOI: 10.1038/31225
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9634232 Abstract: Darwinian evolution has to provide an explanation for cooperative behaviour. Theories of cooperation are based on kin selection (dependent on genetic relatedness), group selection and reciprocal altruism. The idea of reciprocal altruism usually involves direct reciprocity: repeated encounters between the same individuals allow for the return of an altruistic act by the recipient. Here we present a new theoretical framework, which is based on indirect reciprocity and does not require the same two individuals ever to meet again. Individual selection can nevertheless favour cooperative strategies directed towards recipients that have helped others in the past. Cooperation pays because it confers the image of a valuable community member to the cooperating individual. We present computer simulations and analytic models that specify the conditions required for evolutionary stability of indirect reciprocity. We show that the probability of knowing the 'image' of the recipient must exceed the cost-to-benefit ratio of the altruistic act. We propose that the emergence of indirect reciprocity was a decisive step for the evolution of human societies.
Keywords: Altruism, Biological Evolution, Computer Simulation, Cooperative Behavior, Evolutionsbiologie, Good manners, Helping Behavior, Humans, Indirect reciprocity model, Indirekte Reziprozität, Interaktion, Kooperation, Mutation, Reziprozität, Selection, Genetic, Soziale Angemessenheit, Spieltheorie 1997
-
(1997) : The social intelligence hypothesis In: Weingart, Peter; Mitchell, Sandra D.; Richerson, Peter J.; Maasen, Sabine (Hg.): Human by nature. Between biology and the social sciences: Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum, S. 157-179
Abstract: Examines the different components of the social intelligence hypothesis (SIH), which states that the natural intelligence of primates (including humans) originated in the social domain. A working definition of primate intelligence is formulated. A comparison is made between the complexity of social environments and that of ecological ones. Special character traits of primate sociality are described. Preliminary evidence in support of the SIH is discussed. Regarding the question of whether primates are more intelligent in the social domain than in other domains, the following issues are discussed: (1) individuation of group members, (2) combinatorial prediction and action in polyadic encounters, (3) the complexity of physical vs social tools, and (4) the ability to develop a theory of mind. Various selective pressures in primates are described. Examples of traces of social intelligence in ecological intelligence are pointed out. Some suggestions are provided regarding possible methods for testing the SIH.
Keywords: Altruism, Altruismus, Cognitive Processes, combinatorial prediction & action & theory of mind & selective pressures & reciprocal altruism, Evolutionstheorie, Intelligence, Intelligenz, Kognitive Prozesse, Primaten, Primates (Nonhuman), Social & Instinctive Behavior, Social Behavior, Social intelligence, social intelligence hypothesis, Social Perception & Cognition, Social Skills, Sozial- und Instinktverhalten, Soziale Fertigkeiten, Soziale Intelligenz, Soziale Wahrnehmung und soziale Kognition, soziales Verhalten, theoretical study, Theory of Evolution
- <<
- <
- 1