Alle Publikationen
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)
2018
-
(2018): Fairness, fast and slow. A review of dual process models of fairness. In: Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, S. 49-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.02.016
Abstract: Fairness, the notion that people deserve or have rights to certain resources or kinds of treatment, is a fundamental dimension of moral cognition. Drawing on recent evidence from economics, psychology, and neuroscience, we ask whether self-interest is always intuitive, requiring self-control to override with reasoning-based fairness concerns, or whether fairness itself can be intuitive. While we find strong support for rejecting the notion that self-interest is always intuitive, the literature has reached conflicting conclusions about the neurocognitive systems underpinning fairness. We propose that this disagreement can largely be resolved in light of an extended Social Heuristics Hypothesis. Divergent findings may be attributed to the interpretation of behavioral effects of ego depletion or neurostimulation, reverse inference from brain activity to the underlying psychological process, and insensitivity to social context and inter-individual differences. To better dissect the neurobiological basis of fairness, we outline how future research should embrace cross-disciplinary methods that combine psychological manipulations with neuroimaging, and that can probe inter-individual, and cultural heterogeneities.
-
(2018) : Moral judgment: Reflective, interactive, spontaneous, challenging, and always evolving. In: Gray, Kurt James; Graham, Jesse (Hg.): Atlas of moral psychology: What do we evaluate when we evaluate moral character? - Helzer, Erik G.; Critcher, Clayton R.: New York, NY: The Guilford Press
Abstract: Why is moral reasoning fundamental to an explanation of the development of morality? Reasoning is the process by which humans create and apply principles for how individuals ought to treat one another; it is neither innate nor inculcated, but constructed through everyday interactions over the course of development. In this chapter, we discuss the developmental origins of morality, drawing on theories and empirical research in developmental science. Understanding the origins and developmental changes of any phenomenon provides insights into sources of influence, change, and evolution throughout the life course. Although morality was once thought to be the province of adulthood (children were viewed as selfish, antagonistic, or as a blank slate), a large body of research has demonstrated that children are social beings, oriented toward others, motivated to help others and to cooperate, and, beginning in early childhood, capable of drawing categorical distinctions between mo ral cons iderations and other social organizational norms. Moreover, starting at preschool age, children justify moral judgments by reference to fairness, rights, or others’ welfare, whereas they justify conventional judgments by reference to rules, authority, and social traditions. Over several decades, empirical evidence has demonstrated that the developmental emergence of morality stems out of social interactions, both with peers and through adult-child exchanges, and changes slowly over the life course. Morality is constructed through social interactions and observations of events in the world, involving evaluation, reflection, and judgments about the fair treatment of others. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2018): Social decisions and fairness change when people’s interests are represented by autonomous agents. In: Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 32 (1), S. 163-187. DOI: 10.1007/s10458-017-9376-6
Abstract: There has been growing interest on agents that represent people's interests or act on their behalf such as automated negotiators, self-driving cars, or drones. Even though people will interact often with others via these agent representatives, little is known about whether people's behavior changes when acting through these agents, when compared to direct interaction with others. Here we show that people's decisions will change in important ways because of these agents; specifically, we showed that interacting via agents is likely to lead people to behave more fairly, when compared to direct interaction with others. We argue this occurs because programming an agent leads people to adopt a broader perspective, consider the other side's position, and rely on social norms-such as fairness-to guide their decision making. To support this argument, we present four experiments: in Experiment 1 we show that people made fairer offers in the ultimatum and impunity games when interacting via agent representatives, when compared to direct interaction; in Experiment 2, participants were less likely to accept unfair offers in these games when agent representatives were involved; in Experiment 3, we show that the act of thinking about the decisions ahead of time-i.e., under the so-called "strategy method"-can also lead to increased fairness, even when no agents are involved; and, finally, in Experiment 4 we show that participants were less likely to reach an agreement with unfair counterparts in a negotiation setting. We discuss theoretical implications for our understanding of the nature of people's social behavior with agent representatives, as well as practical implications for the design of agents that have the potential to increase fairness in society.
-
(2018): Virtual Character Facial Expressions Influence Human Brain and Facial EMG Activity in a Decision-Making Game. In: IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing 9 (2), S. 285-298. DOI: 10.1109/TAFFC.2016.2601101
Abstract: We examined the effects of the emotional facial expressions of a virtual character (VC) on human frontal electroencephalographic (EEG) asymmetry (putatively indexing approach/withdrawal motivation), facial electromyographic (EMG) activity (emotional expressions), and social decision making (cooperation/defection). In a within-subjects design, the participants played the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma game with VCs with different dynamic facial expressions (predefined or dependent on the participant's electrodermal and facial EMG activity). In general, VC facial expressions elicited congruent facial muscle activity. However, both frontal EEG asymmetry and facial EMG activity elicited by an angry VC facial expression varied as a function of preceding interactional events (human collaboration/defection). Pre-decision inner emotional-motivational processes and emotional facial expressions were dissociated, suggesting that human goals influence pre-decision frontal asymmetry, whereas display rules may affect (pre-decision) emotional expressions in human-VC interaction. An angry VC facial expression, high pre-decision corrugator EMG activity, and relatively greater left frontal activation predicted the participant's decision to defect. Both post-decision frontal asymmetry and facial EMG activity were related to reciprocal cooperation. The results suggest that the justifiability of VC emotional expressions and the perceived fairness of VC actions influence human emotional responses.
-
(2018) : The multi-norm structural social-developmental model of children's intergroup attitudes: Integrating intergroup-loyalty and outgroup fairness norms. In: Vala, Jorge; Waldzus, Sven; Calheiros, Maria Manuela (Hg.): The Social Developmental Construction of Violence and Intergroup Conflict: Berlin, Germany: Axel Springer SE
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42727-0 Abstract: This chapter presents a new complete theoretical model of intergroup attitudes of children—the Multi-Norm Structural Social-Developmental (MNSD) model. The MNSD offers a comprehensive and integrative approach that builds on three extant social-developmental theories that explain the dynamic variation of prejudiced responses during child development. The unique contribution of MNSD is in integrating hypotheses on the role of competing social norms, using social-developmental and social psychological theory. The MNSD proposes that two strong social norms, the ingroup loyalty norm and the norm not to be prejudiced (outgroup fairness norm), operate in a complementary rather than mutually exclusive way in social-developmental intergroup contexts. In specifying when and how these norms become influential and shape intergroup biases of children, the MNSD proposes two kinds of hypotheses, one regarding lasting changes in the availability and internalization of these norms and o ne regar ding the situational and context dependent salience of them. With this the authors explain existing results and generate novel untested systematic hypotheses on how the dynamic relationship between groups' complex normative repertoires and socio-structural variables proposed by social identity theory (status differences, their stability and legitimacy) might operate insidiously to protect or reify the status quo within asymmetric intergroup contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved) Document Type:
-
(2018): Punishing an “unfair” leader. People as pragmatic politicians with in-group but fair-but-biased prosecutors with out-group. In: IIMB Management Review, S. 77-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.iimb.2018.01.002
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2018.01.002 Abstract: Contrary to the fairness expected in the modern world, people seem to treat in-group members (us) better than out-group members (them). Do people then defend in-group members as politicians but prosecute out-group members in a fair-but-biased manner? Given information about injustices by a male or female manager, participants made outrage, attribution, attitude, and punishment responses to the manager. In-group defence held in the first three responses but fairness in punishment. However, the seeming fairness in punishment arose from bias suppression by outrage and mediation by attitude, and the order of mediation was from outrage to attitude and not vice versa.
-
(2018): The origins of infants’ fairness concerns and links to prosocial behavior. In: Current Opinion in Psychology 20, S. 117-121. DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.01.005
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.01.005 Abstract: Concerns about fairness are central to mature moral judgments. We review research regarding the origins of a sensitivity to distributive fairness, and how it relates to early sharing. Infants’ sensitivity to fairness appears to be commensurate with that of school-age children: infants notice violations to fairness norms and evaluate individuals based on their fair or unfair behavior. However, it may differ in other ways: there is no evidence that infants punish unfair individuals. Sharing behavior plays a role in both the developmental emergence of, and subsequent individual differences in, infants’ fairness concerns. These results motivate novel questions, such whether infants can entertain other models of fairness, whether infants’ socio-moral concerns hang together, and the relationship early fairness sensitivities and later fair behavior. PMID: 29427877
-
(2018): Normative expectations about fairness. The development of a charity norm in preschoolers. In: Journal of experimental child psychology 165, S. 66-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.016
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28477951 Abstract: This study investigated preschool children's normative expectations about the fair distribution of resources. We examined whether preschool children have a norm of charity, that is, a norm to give more to poor individuals than to wealthy individuals. To this end, we presented 3- to 6-year-olds (N=81) with two different resource allocation situations. In one situation, an agent complied with a norm of charity by allocating more resources to a poor recipient than to a rich recipient. In the other situation, a different agent violated the norm by allocating more resources to a wealthy recipient. We assessed (a) children's verbal protest and affirmation during the resource allocation situations, (b) their punishing and rewarding behavior toward the agents, and (c) their evaluations of the agents' behavior. The results show that older (5- and 6-year-old) preschool children enforced norm-compliant behavior and protested against the norm violation of the protagonist who gave more items to the wealthy recipient, but this was not the case in younger preschool children. These findings demonstrate that older preschool children consider charity as a norm and enforce this norm toward third parties.
Keywords: Child, Child Behavior/psychology, Child, Preschool, Entstehung von Normen, Entwicklungspsychologie, Fairness, Female, Gerechtigkeit, Gerechtigkeit in Bezug auf demographische Observablen, Gleichverteilung, Humans, Male, Moral Development, Normenwandel, Psychology, Child, Punishment, Resource Allocation, Reward, Social Justice/psychology, Social Norms, Werte 2017
-
(2017): Fairness and family background. In: Politics, Philosophy & Economics 16 (2), S. 117-131. DOI: 10.1177/1470594X15618966
Abstract: Fairness preferences fundamentally affect individual behavior and play an important role in shaping social and political institutions. However, people differ both with respect to what they view as fair and with respect to how much weight they attach to fairness considerations. In this article, we study the role of family background in explaining these heterogeneities in fairness preferences. In particular, we examine how socioeconomic background relates to fairness views and to how people make trade-offs between fairness and self-interest. To study this, we conducted an economic experiment with a representative sample of 14- to 15-year-old and matched the experimental data to administrative data on parental income and education. The participants made two distributive choices in the experiment. The first choice was to distribute money between themselves and another participant in a situation where there was no difference in merit. The second choice was to distribute money between two other participants with unequal merits. Our main finding is that there is a systematic difference in fairness view between children from low-socioceconomic status (SES) families and the rest of the participants; more than 50 percent of the participants from low-SES families are egalitarians, whereas only about 20 percent in the rest of the sample hold this fairness view. In contrast, we find no significant difference in the weight attached to fairness between children from different socioeconomic groups.
-
(2017): Motivated cognition and fairness. Insights, integration, and creating a path forward. In: The Journal of applied psychology 102 (6), S. 867-889. DOI: 10.1037/apl0000204
DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28277729 Abstract: How do individuals form fairness perceptions? This question has been central to the fairness literature since its inception, sparking a plethora of theories and a burgeoning volume of research. To date, the answer to this question has been predicated on the assumption that fairness perceptions are subjective (i.e., "in the eye of the beholder"). This assumption is shared with motivated cognition approaches, which highlight the subjective nature of perceptions and the importance of viewing individuals arriving at those perceptions as active and motivated processors of information. Further, the motivated cognition literature has other key insights that have been less explicitly paralleled in the fairness literature, including how different goals (e.g., accuracy, directional) can influence how individuals process information and arrive at their perceptions. In this integrative conceptual review, we demonstrate how interpreting extant theory and research related to the formation of fairness perceptions through the lens of motivated cognition can deepen our understanding of fairness, including how individuals' goals and motivations can influence their subjective perceptions of fairness. We show how this approach can provide integration as well as generate new insights into fairness processes. We conclude by highlighting the implications that applying a motivated cognition perspective can have for the fairness literature and by providing a research agenda to guide the literature moving forward. (PsycINFO Database Record
-
(2017): Kommunikation, Interaktion und soziale Gruppenprozesse. 1. Auflage. Göttingen: Hogrefe (Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Themenbereich C, Theorie und Forschung. Serie VI, Sozialpsychologie)
Abstract: Ausgehend von einem Beispiel für ein soziales Dilemma wird ein Überblick über die sozialpsychologische Forschung zu Kooperation und Wettbewerb in sozialen Dilemmata gegeben. Nach einer Klärung der wesentlichen Begriffe (Kooperation, Wettbewerb, Altruismus, Boshaftigkeit) werden folgende Aspekte behandelt: (1) Die bekanntesten Zwei-Personen-Dilemmata (das Gefangenendilemma; "Assurance"-Spiel; "Chicken"-Spiel). (2) Mehr-Personen-Dilemmata (das Dilemma öffentlicher Güter; Team-Games). (3) Fairness und Kooperation. Abschließend werden zentrale Ergebnisse der Forschung über soziale Dilemmata kritisch gewürdigt und Probleme und offene Fragen werden diskutiert.
-
(2017): On the Malleability of Fairness Ideals. Spillover Effects in Partial and Impartial Allocation Tasks. In: Journal of Economic Psychology, S. 60-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2017.11.001
Abstract: How malleable are people’s fairness ideals? Although fairness is an oft-invoked concept in allocation situations, it is still unclear whether and to what extent people’s allocations reflect their fairness ideals. We investigate in a laboratory experiment whether people’s fairness ideals are sensitive to spillover effects associated with the specific order of allocation tasks. Participants first generate resources in a real-effort task and then distribute them. In the partial allocation task, the participant determines the earnings for herself and another participant. In the impartial allocation task, the participant determines the earnings for two other participants. We also manipulate the participants’ experience, i.e, whether they took part in similar allocation experiments before. We find that participants are more likely to allocate more resources to themselves than what they earned in the real-effort task when they decide partially. Exclusively for inexperienced participants, deciding impartially first dampens selfish behavior when they decide partially.
-
(2017): Justice and Fairness in Negotiation. In: Group Decision and Negotiation 26 (1), S. 9-17. DOI: 10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9496-4 Abstract: In this special issue we display a variety of approaches to the study of justice. Articles from scholars working on questions involving justice and fairness in decision making exchanges calls attention to a variety of research approaches, issue domains, cases and hypotheses used to explore these questions. All of the contributions emphasize analysis, using quantitative and qualitative methods including simulation-experiments, comparative case studies, statistical analyses and game theory. The articles in this collection reveal that justice and fairness concerns extend from the negotiation process to the outcome and into the implementation stage. They share the underlying expectation that individuals and groups gravitate toward fairness and justice in their exchanges with others. Therefore, a full understanding of group decision processes will be incomplete if justice and fairness issues are not considered alongside issues such as power distributions and alternatives to an agreeme nt. The authors also suggest that outcomes built on justice and fairness principles will enhance the efficiency, stability and implementation of the negotiated agreements. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): Moral foundations tell us why guilt induces unfair allocation in multi-party interactions. In: Asian Journal of Social Psychology 20 (3-4), S. 191-200. DOI: 10.1111/ajsp.12170
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12170 Abstract: Previous studies have demonstrated that a sense of guilt promotes and maintains social fairness in two‐party interactions (Psychological Bulletin, 115, 1994 and 243). However, the situation is much more complex in three‐party or multi‐party interactions. De Hooge et al. (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 2011 and 462) found that guilt could not only induce pro‐social behaviour towards the victim, but also have a disadvantageous impact on a third party. In the present study, we attempt to explain how guilt promotes unfair allocations from a moral foundations perspective. We conducted two experiments using a ‘three‐party dictator game’ paradigm. Firstly, it was repeatedly verified that guilt could induce unfair allocations in three‐party interactions. Secondly, five moral foundations (harm, fairness, ingroup, hierarchy and purity) were measured. Then the moderating and main effects of these five indices on how guilt affects the fair allocati on of re sources were explored using regression analysis. The results show that competition between harm and fairness in individual traits can explain the disadvantageous effect of guilt on fair allocations: the fairness foundation promoted equality in allocation, while the harm foundation promoted victim compensation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): Do We Gossip for Moral Reasons?. The Intersection of Moral Foundations and Gossip. In: Basic and Applied Social Psychology 39 (4), S. 218-230. DOI: 10.1080/01973533.2017.1336713
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2017.1336713 Abstract: Gossip is comprised of evaluative talk about absent others. Although such evaluations may be moral or non-moral, moral judgments often precede the transmission of gossip. This work explored the salience of moral and non-moral motivations to transmit gossip-like information. Two studies explored the relationships between the general tendency to gossip, transmission of, and interest in gossip, five moral foundations (Harm/care, Fairness/reciprocity, Ingroup/loyalty, Authority/respect, Purity/sanctity), their sacredness in relational contexts, and moral and non-moral motives to gossip. Results from Studies 1 (negative gossip—infidelity) and 2 (positive gossip—fidelity) indicated that moral motives to gossip were more important than non-moral motives. The contribution of morality in perpetuating gossip was discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
Keywords: Authority, Fairness, Gossip, Ingroup Outgroup, Moral, Loyalty, Morality, Reciprocity, respect, social psychology, Sozialpsychologie -
(2017): The importance of peers for compliance with norms of fair sharing. In: European Economic Review 97, S. 72-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2017.06.001
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2017.06.001 Abstract: A burgeoning literature in economics has started examining the role of social norms in explaining economic behavior. Surprisingly, the vast majority of this literature has studied social norms in asocial decision settings, where individuals are observed to act in isolation from each other. In this paper we use a large-scale dictator game experiment (N = 850) to show that “peers” can have a profound influence on individuals’ perceptions of norms of fair sharing, which we elicit in an incentive compatible way. However, in contrast to these strong peer effects in social norms of fair sharing, we find limited evidence of the influence of norms and peers on actual sharing behavior. We discuss how these results can be explained by heterogeneity in normative views as well as in willingness to comply with norms.
-
(2017): Are you a human or a humanoid. Predictive user modelling through behavioural analysis of online gameplay data. In: Advanced Engineering Informatics 33, S. 410-424. DOI: 10.1016/j.aei.2017.01.004
Abstract: Intelligent agents are widely used in robotics, gaming and simulation. A key issue is modelling human behaviours so that intelligent agents can use a human's behavioural model to imitate them and predict their next moves. In this article, we use Internet-based multiplayer online gaming (MOG) as a case study to present our approach to predictive user modelling through behavioural analysis of online gameplay data. As latency is an inherited bottleneck of the Internet and is likely to remain so into a foreseeable future, a lot of efforts have been made to address the resulting issues. Most of the existing latency handling techniques are based on the assumption that latency is within an acceptable threshold so that they can alleviate or even completely hide its negative impact on players' quality of experience (QoE) that directly determines consumers' satisfaction of the provided MOG services. While this assumption is mostly valid, it is worth noting that a player's Internet connection latency always fluctuates (known as jitter), possibly to the extent of exceeding a MOG's designated threshold in which case none of the techniques can handle properly but disconnecting the player from the gameplay session. Forcing a player to quit prematurely simply due to a spike of unusual high latency has a significant negative impact both on the gameplay's fairness and on the player's QoE. To improve customer satisfaction of a MOG service, we propose a more tolerant approach by temporarily substituting a player with a humanoid bot in the event of latency hikes so that the player always remains in the gameplay session. The challenge in this approach is to create a personalised humanoid bot that can imitate the playing pattern of the individual human player being substituted. Our solution is to first extract key variables that have impact on the human player's decision-makings through behavioural analysis of the player's historical gameplay data, then model the relationships among these variables, and finally creates the player's humanoid bot with the model. In this paper, we use a multiplayer online pong game as a case study to explain behavioural variables, modelling techniques, processes, outcomes, and performance studies.
-
(2017): Philosophy of games. In: Philosophy Compass 12 (8). DOI: 10.1111/phc3.12426
Abstract: What is a game? What are we doing when we play a game? What is the value of playing games? Several different philosophical subdisciplines have attempted to answer these questions using very distinctive frameworks. Some have approached games as something like a text, deploying theoretical frameworks from the study of narrative, fiction, and rhetoric to interrogate games for their representational content. Others have approached games as artworks and asked questions about the authorship of games, about the ontology of the work and its performance. Yet others, from the philosophy of sport, have focused on normative issues of fairness, rule application, and competition. The primary purpose of this article is to provide an overview of several different philosophical approaches to games and, hopefully, demonstrate the relevance and value of the different approaches to each other. Early academic attempts to cope with games tried to treat games as a subtype of narrative and to interpret games exactly as one might interpret a static, linear narrative. A faction of game studies, self-described as ludologists, argued that games were a substantially novel form and could not be treated with traditional tools for narrative analysis. In traditional narrative, an audience is told and interprets the story, where in a game, the player enacts and creates the story. Since that early debate, theorists have attempted to offer more nuanced accounts of how games might achieve similar ends to more traditional texts. For example, games might be seen as a novel type of fiction, which uses interactive techniques to achieve immersion in a fictional world. Alternately, games might be seen as a new way to represent causal systems, and so a new way to criticize social and political entities. Work from contemporary analytic philosophy of art has, on the other hand, asked questions whether games could be artworks and, if so, what kind. Much of this debate has concerned the precise nature of the artwork, and the relationship between the artist and the audience. Some have claimed that the audience is a cocreator of the artwork, and so games are a uniquely unfinished and cooperative art form. Others have claimed that, instead, the audience does not help create the artwork; rather, interacting with the artwork is how an audience member appreciates the artist's finished production. Other streams of work have focused less on the game as a text or work, and more on game play as a kind of activity. One common view is that game play occurs in a magic circle. Inside the magic circle, players take on new roles, follow different rules, and actions have different meanings. Actions inside the magic circle do not have their usual consequences for the rest of life. Enemies of the magic circle view have claimed that the view ignores the deep integration of game life from ordinary life and point to gambling, gold farming, and the status effects of sports. Philosophers of sport, on the other hand, have approached games with an entirely different framework. This has lead into investigations about the normative nature of gameswhat guides the applications of rules and how those rules might be applied, interpreted, or even changed. Furthermore, they have investigated games as social practices and as forms of life.
-
(2017): Treating Broome Fairly. In: Utilitas 29 (02), S. 214-238. DOI: 10.1017/S0953820816000303
Abstract: John Broome has developed an elegant and powerful theory of fairness. It is important to lay out his theory afresh because the basic structure of Broome's theory has been generally misunderstood. Once we understand its general structure, we are in a better position to assess what its normative implications are. In discussing objections that have been raised against Broome's theory, I will show that these implications are different from what his critics have commonly assumed.
-
(2017): Buddhism, identity, and class. Fairness and favoritism in the Tyva Republic. In: Religion, Brain & Behavior 8 (2), S. 205-226. DOI: 10.1080/2153599X.2016.1267031
Abstract: Current research suggests that commitment to moralistic, omniscient, and punitive gods may contribute to the evolution of cooperation. As they may curb antisocial behaviors that incur costly social repercussions, supernatural punishment may help stabilize reciprocal relationships among peers. One recent elaboration of this hypothesis posits that commitment to such gods may boost prosociality to the point that it expands cooperation beyond one's family and local community. Using three permutations of an experimental game designed to measure impartial fairness, the present study tests this hypothesis among Buddhists from the Tyva Republic. Contrary to the expanded sociality hypothesis, we found that key features of local spirits and Buddha systematically predict favoritism toward co-religionists from one's community rather than fairness toward co-religionists from distant towns. Moreover, important indicators of class - years of formal education, material insecurity, and fluency in the Tyvan language - also predict favoritism toward local Buddhists rather than geographically distant Buddhists. We used a Buddhist protection charm as a prime condition that showed no simple effects across games, but did interact with key religious variables. Importantly, when players had a stake in the game and played against anonymous, geographically distant Buddhists, if the experiment reminded them of the Buddhist temple or charity, they were fairer toward the distant co-religionist.
-
(2017): Structural power and the evolution of collective fairness in social networks. In: PLoS one 12 (4). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175687
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175687 Abstract: From work contracts and group buying platforms to political coalitions and international climate and economical summits, often individuals assemble in groups that must collectively reach decisions that may favor each part unequally. Here we quantify to which extent our network ties promote the evolution of collective fairness in group interactions, modeled by means of Multiplayer Ultimatum Games (MUG). We show that a single topological feature of social networks-which we call structural power-has a profound impact on the tendency of individuals to take decisions that favor each part equally. Increased fair outcomes are attained whenever structural power is high, such that the networks that tie individuals allow them to meet the same partners in different groups, thus providing the opportunity to strongly influence each other. On the other hand, the absence of such close peer-influence relationships dismisses any positive effect created by the network. Interestingly, we show that increasing the structural power of a network leads to the appearance of well-defined modules-as found in human social networks that often exhibit community structure-providing an interaction environment that maximizes collective fairness.
-
(2017): Do Individuals Value Distributional Fairness?. How Inequality Affects Majority Decisions. In: Political Behavior 85 (4). DOI: 10.1007/s11109-017-9424-6
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-017-9424-6 Abstract: The so-called chaos theorems imply that, under most preference configurations, majority voting in n-dimensional policy spaces is theoretically unrestricted. Empirical research, however, shows an apparent stability of democratic decisions. Recent theoretical developments have emphasized social preferences as a possible explanation for overcoming majority rule’s instability problem. Hence, it is assumed that individuals not only maximize their own well-being, but also value distributional fairness. However, there is little experimental research into the influence of social preferences on majority decisions. This article presents findings from laboratory experiments on majority decisions in two-dimensional policy spaces with a systematic variation of the fairness properties of the incentive structures. The results show that distributional fairness is an important motivational factor in democratic decisions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): Encouraging Prosocial Decisions. The Role of Fairness Salience and Uncertainty. In: Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 30 (2), S. 502-515. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.1970
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1970 Abstract: Although the decision to engage in prosocial behavior has received research attention, the literature offers a limited understanding of fairness and uncertainty as antecedents. We propose that one can encourage prosocial decision making simply by invoking the notion of fairness because of its effects on the perceived trustworthiness of the invoking party. We also elucidate the complex role of uncertainty in prosocial decisions in that it has a negative effect while also serving to strengthen the positive effect of fairness salience. Our ideas are tested in two prosocial decision contexts, including participative pricing (i.e., 'pay what you want') and charitable giving. Data from an archival study of a naturally occurring event and two controlled experiments offer support for our arguments. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)
-
(2017): SENTIMENTS, CONDUCT, AND TRUST IN THE LABORATORY. In: Social Philosophy and Policy 34 (01), S. 25-55. DOI: 10.1017/S0265052517000024
Abstract: In this essay we provide a brief account and interpretation of The Theory of Moral Sentiments showing that it departs fundamentally from contemporary patterns of thought in economics that are believed to govern individual behavior in small groups, and contains strong testable propositions governing the expression of that behavior. We also state a formal representation of the model for individual choice of action, apply the propositions to the prediction of actions in trust games, report two experiments testing these predictions, and interpret the results in terms directly related to the model. In short, we argue that the system of sociability developed by Adam Smith provides a coherent non-utilitarian model that is consistent with the pattern of results in trust games, and leads to testable new predictions, some of which we test.