Gender differences in ultimatum games: Despite rather than due to risk attitudes

Garcı́a-Gallego, Aurora; Georgantzı́s, Nikolaos; Jaramillo-Gutiérrez, Ainhoa

doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2011.06.012

Cited by 45 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 39 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Harbaugh and colleagues (2003) found that proposers in the UG offered better outcomes as they grew older, whereas Murnighan and Saxon (1998) found the opposite. Similar mixed results on age and sex have been found in recent contributions in adults (e.g., Carpenter, Burks, & Verhoogen, 2005;Eckel & Grossman, 2008;García-Gallego, Georgantzís, & Jaramillo-Gutiérrez, 2012;Saad & Gill, 2001;Solnick, 2001). In children, sex differences have not been explored (e.g., Güroglu, van den Bos, & Crone, 2009;Sutter, 2007;Wittig, Jensen, & Tomasello, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Do sex and age affect strategic behavior and inequity aversion in children?

Guerra

Leiva

Colell

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Do sex and age affect strategic behavior and inequity aversion in children?

Guerra

Leiva

Colell

et al. 2016

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Eckel and Grossman (2008) argue that inconsistencies occur because the inclusion of risk in social dilemma paradigms has a more pronounced effect of decisions in women than in men, based on the notion that women may be more risk-averse than men (Byrnes et al, 1999; Charness and Gneezy, 2012). However, in a study specifically designed to test this hypothesis, higher risk-aversion in women did not result in lower rejection rates in an Ultimatum Game (García-Gallego et al, 2012). According to Croson and Gneezy (2009), gender differences in social decision making exist because women are more sensitive to the social cues when faced with a decision and therefore are more affected by variations in experimental setups than men, while men display relative stable behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Gender Moderates the Influence of Self-Construal Priming on Fairness Considerations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in social and cultural psychology has identified that self-construal, or the way the self is defined in relation to others, plays an important role in social decision-making processes. Yet it remains difficult to isolate the effect of self-construal in a comparative approach. Therefore, we used priming methodology in three studies to induce either an independent or interdependent mindset to test direct consequences on fairness considerations. Specifically, we asked whether participants would accept an unfair ultimatum game offer: a split of 10 euros, where the participant is allocated the marginal share of 3 and the proposer 7. If the participant refuses, neither gets paid. In the first study, we used the well-known similarities and differences prime. Here, activating an interdependent mindset decreased rejection of the unfair offer compared to the independent mindset and control condition, but only in females. The prime did not affect males. In the second and third study we modified our university's mission statement to instead include either independent or interdependent values. Females displayed a similar direction of effects; in males however, activating an interdependent mindset increased rejection. Taken together, the results show that whether participants accept or reject an unfair offer depends on both their gender and the self-construal prime. The results were interpreted using the distinction between relational independence that has been associated with females, and collective interdependence, that has been associated with males. Possible consequences for future studies are discussed.

show abstract

“…Results with regard to age, gender, income and education effects are often inconclusive (recent contributions are, for instance, Saad and Gill, 2001;Eckel and Grossman, 2001;Solnick, 2001;Carpenter et al, 2005;Garcia-Gallego et al, 2012), especially if one takes a look at the overall picture over the last 30 years.…”

Section: Socio-demographic and Individual Determinants Of Playmentioning

confidence: 99%

More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature

Güth

Kocher²

2014

Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization

328

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Take-it or leave-it offers are probably as old as mankind. Our objective here is, first, to provide a, probably subjectively-colored, recollection of the initial ultimatum game experiment, its motivation and the immediate responses. Second, we discuss important extensions of the standard ultimatum bargaining game in a unified framework, and, third, we offer a survey of the experimental ultimatum bargaining literature containing papers published since the turn of the century. The paper argues that the ultimatum game is an extremely versatile tool for research in bargaining and on social preferences. Finally, we provide examples for open research questions and directions for future studies.Keywords: ultimatum bargaining, experiment, social preferences. JEL classification: C91 This version: 21 August 2013* When Güth presented the more recent ultimatum-like experiments, Uri Gneezy suggested writing a survey of more than 30 years of ultimatum bargaining research. We thank him for the nudge and David Bauder as well as Niklas Garnadt for excellent research assistance. We are extremely grateful to the magnificent members of the Economic Science Association Discussion List; many of them -too many to mention each by namepointed us to scholarly papers that use the ultimatum game. All remaining errors and omissions are of course ours. §

show abstract

Gender differences in ultimatum games: Despite rather than due to risk attitudes

Cited by 45 publications

References 39 publications

Do sex and age affect strategic behavior and inequity aversion in children?

Do sex and age affect strategic behavior and inequity aversion in children?

Gender Moderates the Influence of Self-Construal Priming on Fairness Considerations

More than thirty years of ultimatum bargaining experiments: Motives, variations, and a survey of the recent literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About