1
|
Qian J, Sun X, Zhang T, Chai Y. Authority or Autonomy? Exploring Interactions between Central and Peer Punishments in Risk-Resistant Scenarios. ENTROPY (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2022; 24:1289. [PMID: 36141176 PMCID: PMC9497953 DOI: 10.3390/e24091289] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Revised: 09/05/2022] [Accepted: 09/09/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Game theory provides a powerful means to study human cooperation and better understand cooperation-facilitating mechanisms in general. In classical game-theoretic models, an increase in group cooperation constantly increases people's gains, implying that individual gains are a continuously varying function of the cooperation rate. However, this is inconsistent with the increasing number of risk-resistant scenarios in reality. A risk-resistant scenario means once a group does not successfully resist the risk, all individuals lose their resources, such as a community coping with COVID-19 and a village resisting a flood. In other words, individuals' gains are segmented about the collaboration rate. This paper builds a risk-resistant model to explore whether punishment still promotes collaboration when people resist risk. The results show that central and peer punishments can both encourage collaboration but with different characteristics under different risk-resistant scenarios. Specifically, central punishment constrains the collaboration motivated by peer punishment regardless of risk, while peer punishment limits the collaboration induced by central punishment only when the risk is high. Our findings provide insights into the balance between peer punishment from public autonomy and central punishment from central governance, and the proposed model paves the way for the development of richer risk-resistant models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jun Qian
- National Engineering Laboratory for E-Commerce Technologies, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
| | - Xiao Sun
- National Engineering Laboratory for E-Commerce Technologies, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
| | - Tongda Zhang
- Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
| | - Yueting Chai
- National Engineering Laboratory for E-Commerce Technologies, Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chajes JR, Grossmann T, Vaish A. Fairness takes time: Development of cooperative decision making in fairness context. J Exp Child Psychol 2022; 216:105344. [PMID: 35030385 PMCID: PMC8851981 DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/02/2021] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
The current study examined the development of fairness behavior and tested whether children's fair choices are fast and intuitive or slow and deliberate. Reaction times were measured while 4- to 9-year-olds (N = 94, 49 girls, 84.6% White) completed a novel social decision-making task contrasting fair choices with selfish choices. Fairness behavior increased during childhood, shifting from predominantly selfish choices among young children to fair choices by 7 years of age. Moreover, young children's fair choices were slow and deliberate, whereas reaction times did not predict older children's choices. These findings contrast with adults' intuitive cooperation and point to protracted development and learning of cooperative decision making in fairness contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Johanna R Chajes
- Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.
| | - Tobias Grossmann
- Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA
| | - Amrisha Vaish
- Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gainsburg I, Sowden WJ, Drake B, Herold W, Kross E. Distanced self-talk increases rational self-interest. Sci Rep 2022; 12:511. [PMID: 35017562 PMCID: PMC8752811 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-04010-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Accepted: 10/13/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Does stepping back to evaluate a situation from a distanced perspective lead us to be selfish or fair? This question has been of philosophical interest for centuries, and, more recently, the focus of extensive empirical inquiry. Yet, extant research reveals a puzzle: some studies suggest that adopting a distanced perspective will produce more rationally self-interested behavior, whereas others suggest that it will produce more impartial behavior. Here we adjudicate between these perspectives by testing the effects of adopting a third-person perspective on decision making in a task that pits rational self-interest against impartiality: the dictator game. Aggregating across three experiments (N = 774), participants who used third-person (i.e., distanced) vs. first-person (i.e., immersed) self-talk during the dictator game kept more money for themselves. We discuss these results in light of prior research showing that psychological distance can promote cooperation and fairmindedness and how the effect of psychological distance on moral decision-making may be sensitive to social context.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Izzy Gainsburg
- Psychology Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA. .,Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA. .,Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA.
| | - Walter J Sowden
- Psychology Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.,Department of Behavioral Health, Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, USA
| | | | | | - Ethan Kross
- Psychology Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.,Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Integration of social status and trust through interpersonal brain synchronization. Neuroimage 2021; 246:118777. [PMID: 34864151 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118777] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Revised: 11/30/2021] [Accepted: 12/01/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Trust can be a dynamic social process, during which the social identity of the interacting agents (e.g., an investor and a trustee) can bias trust outcomes. Here, we investigated how social status modulates trust and the neural mechanisms underlying this process. An investor and a trustee performed a 10-round repeated trust game while their brain activity was being simultaneously recorded using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. The social status (either high or low) of both investors and trustees was manipulated via a math competition task. The behavioral results showed that in the initial round, individuals invested more in low-status partners. However, the investment ratio increased faster as the number of rounds increased during trust interaction when individuals were paired with a high-status partner. This increasing trend was particularly prominent in the low (investor)-high (trustee) status group. Moreover, the low-high group showed increased investor-trustee brain synchronization in the right temporoparietal junction as the number of rounds increased, while brain activation in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex of the investor decreased as the number of rounds increased. Both interpersonal brain synchronization and brain activation predicted investment performance at the early stage; furthermore, two-brain data provided earlier predictions than did single-brain data. These effects were detectable in the investment phase in the low-high group only; no comparable effects were observed in the repayment phase or other groups. Overall, this study demonstrated a multi-brain mechanism for the integration of social status and trust.
Collapse
|
5
|
No effect of 'watching eyes': An attempted replication and extension investigating individual differences. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0255531. [PMID: 34613975 PMCID: PMC8494318 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255531] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Accepted: 07/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Some evidence suggests that people behave more cooperatively and generously when observed or in the presence of images of eyes (termed the 'watching eyes' effect). Eye images are thought to trigger feelings of observation, which in turn motivate people to behave more cooperatively to earn a good reputation. However, several recent studies have failed to find evidence of the eyes effect. One possibility is that inconsistent evidence in support of the eyes effect is a product of individual differences in sensitivity or susceptibility to the cue. In fact, some evidence suggests that people who are generally more prosocial are less susceptible to situation-specific reputation-based cues of observation. In this paper, we sought to (1) replicate the eyes effect, (2) replicate the past finding that people who are dispositionally less prosocial are more responsive to observation than people who are more dispositionally more prosocial, and (3) determine if this effect extends to the watching eyes effect. Results from a pre-registered study showed that people did not give more money in a dictator game when decisions were made public or in the presence of eye images, even though participants felt more observed when decisions were public. That is, we failed to replicate the eyes effect and observation effect. An initial, but underpowered, interaction model suggests that egoists give less than prosocials in private, but not public, conditions. This suggests a direction for future research investigating if and how individual differences in prosociality influence observation effects.
Collapse
|
6
|
Tusche A, Bas LM. Neurocomputational models of altruistic decision-making and social motives: Advances, pitfalls, and future directions. WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS. COGNITIVE SCIENCE 2021; 12:e1571. [PMID: 34340256 PMCID: PMC9286344 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.1571] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2021] [Revised: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 07/01/2021] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
This article discusses insights from computational models and social neuroscience into motivations, precursors, and mechanisms of altruistic decision-making and other-regard. We introduce theoretical and methodological tools for researchers who wish to adopt a multilevel, computational approach to study behaviors that promote others' welfare. Using examples from recent studies, we outline multiple mental and neural processes relevant to altruism. To this end, we integrate evidence from neuroimaging, psychology, economics, and formalized mathematical models. We introduce basic mechanisms-pertinent to a broad range of value-based decisions-and social emotions and cognitions commonly recruited when our decisions involve other people. Regarding the latter, we discuss how decomposing distinct facets of social processes can advance altruistic models and the development of novel, targeted interventions. We propose that an accelerated synthesis of computational approaches and social neuroscience represents a critical step towards a more comprehensive understanding of altruistic decision-making. We discuss the utility of this approach to study lifespan differences in social preference in late adulthood, a crucial future direction in aging global populations. Finally, we review potential pitfalls and recommendations for researchers interested in applying a computational approach to their research. This article is categorized under: Economics > Interactive Decision-Making Psychology > Emotion and Motivation Neuroscience > Cognition Economics > Individual Decision-Making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Tusche
- Department of Psychology, Queen's University, Ontario, Kingston, Canada.,Department of Economics, Queen's University, Ontario, Kingston, Canada.,Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA
| | - Lisa M Bas
- Department of Psychology, Queen's University, Ontario, Kingston, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zwirner E, Raihani N. Neighbourhood wealth, not urbanicity, predicts prosociality towards strangers. Proc Biol Sci 2020; 287:20201359. [PMID: 33023420 PMCID: PMC7657855 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2020.1359] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2020] [Accepted: 09/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Urbanization is perhaps the most significant and rapid cause of demographic change in human societies, with more than half the world's population now living in cities. Urban lifestyles have been associated with increased risk for mental disorders, greater stress responses, and lower trust. However, it is not known whether a general tendency towards prosocial behaviour varies across the urban-rural gradient, or whether other factors such as neighbourhood wealth might be more predictive of variation in prosocial behaviour. Here, we present findings from three real-world experiments conducted in 37 different neighbourhoods, in 12 cities and 12 towns and villages across the UK. We measured whether people: (i) posted a lost letter; (ii) returned a dropped item; and (iii) stopped to let someone cross the road in each neighbourhood. We expected to find that people were less willing to help a stranger in more urban locations, with increased diffusion of responsibility and perceived anonymity in cities being measured as variables that might drive this effect. Our data did not support this hypothesis. There was no effect of either urbanicity or population density on people's willingness to help a stranger. Instead, the neighbourhood level of deprivation explained most of the variance in helping behaviour with help being offered less frequently in more deprived neighbourhoods. These findings highlight the importance of socio-economic factors, rather than urbanicity per se, in shaping variation in prosocial behaviour in humans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elena Zwirner
- Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
| | - Nichola Raihani
- Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AP, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
McAuliffe WHB, Burton-Chellew MN, McCullough ME. Cooperation and Learning in Unfamiliar Situations. CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 2019. [DOI: 10.1177/0963721419848673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Human social life is rife with uncertainty. In any given encounter, one can wonder whether cooperation will generate future benefits. Many people appear to resolve this dilemma by initially cooperating, perhaps because (a) encounters in everyday life often have future consequences, and (b) the costs of alienating oneself from long-term social partners often outweighed the short-term benefits of acting selfishly over our evolutionary history. However, because cooperating with other people does not always advance self-interest, people might also learn to withhold cooperation in certain situations. Here, we review evidence for two ideas: that people (a) initially cooperate or not depending on the incentives that are typically available in their daily lives and (b) also learn through experience to adjust their cooperation on the basis of the incentives of unfamiliar situations. We compare these claims with the widespread view that anonymously helping strangers in laboratory settings is motivated by altruistic desires. We conclude that the evidence is more consistent with the idea that people stop cooperating in unfamiliar situations because they learn that it does not help them, either financially or through social approval.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William H. B. McAuliffe
- Department of Psychology, University of Miami
- Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School
| | | | | |
Collapse
|