Individual and developmental differences in the relationship between preferences and theory of mind.

Leipold, Kristina; Vetter, Nora C.; Dittrich, Marcus; Lehmann-Waffenschmidt, Marco; Kliegel, Matthias

doi:10.1037/npe0000008

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are consistent with those of Gächter et al [19] who find that more cooperative followers contribute more as leaders. They are also consistent with those of Leipold et al [21] who find that cooperative individuals are better at predicting the types of others. The distinguishing aspect of our results is that we obtain them in a more 'extreme' environment where the potential gains to strategic behavior are higher.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…contribution would have been for someone who purely wants to maximize own payoff. 21 The optimum was zero in all games except a leader-follower game with an MPCR of 0.8. In this game the optimal leader contribution was the full endowment of 20.…”

Section: Leader Behaviormentioning

confidence: 94%

“…This partly reflected a false consensus effect where cooperative leaders were more optimistic about followers. Likewise, Leipold et al [21] find that cooperative types are better at predicting what others will do. Note, however, that we are the first to consider a setting where the selfish interest is to contribute.…”

Section: Leader Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conditional Cooperation and the Marginal per Capita Return in Public Good Games

Cartwright

Lovett

2014

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate experimentally whether the extent of conditional cooperation in public good games depends on the marginal per capita return (MPCR) to the public good and type of game. The MPCR is varied from 0.2 to 0.4 to 0.8. The 'standard' game, in which three players contribute before a follower, is compared with a leader-follower game, in which one player leads and three follow. Even though we observe less conditional cooperation for an MPCR of 0.2, the prevalence of conditional cooperation remains relatively stable to changes in the MPCR and game timing. In contrast, the level of MPCR has a strong effect on unconditional contributions. Our results highlight the critical role played by leaders in a public good game.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Leader Behaviormentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conditional Cooperation and the Marginal per Capita Return in Public Good Games

Cartwright

Lovett

2014

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the behavior of a child interacting with cooperative co-players is difficult to compare to the behavior of another child interacting with selfish co-players. Although some work with children has employed computergenerated co-players (Leipold, Vetter, Dittrich, LehmannWaffenschmidt, & Kliegel, 2013;McClure et al, 2007;Sally & Hill, 2006), these studies either implemented responsive algorithms that tethered the co-players' contributions to the previous decision of the subject (McClure et al, 2007;Sally & Hill, 2006) or divided subjects into different experimental groups, with each subgroup facing different strategies (Leipold et al, 2013). Thus, little or no work has used experimental designs in which each subject faced identical strategies of the other co-players.…”

Section: Age and Gender Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pizzagame: A virtual public goods game to assess cooperative behavior in children and adolescents

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social dilemmas are characterized by conflicts between immediate self-interest and long-term collective goals. Although such conflicts lie at the heart of various challenging social interactions, we know little about how cooperation in these situations develops. To extend work on social dilemmas to child and adolescent samples, we developed an ageappropriate computer task (the Pizzagame) with the structural features of a public goods game (PGG). We administered the Pizzagame to a sample of 191 children 9 to 16 years of age. Subjects were led to believe they were playing the game over the Internet with three sets of two same-aged, same-sex coplayers. In fact, the co-players were computer-generated and programmed to expose children to three consecutive conditions: (1) a cooperative strategy, (2) a selfish strategy, and (3) divergent cooperative-selfish strategies. Supporting the validity of the Pizzagame, our results revealed that children and adolescents displayed conditional cooperation, such that their contributions rose with the increasing cooperativeness of their co-players. Age and gender did not influence children and adolescents' cooperative behavior within each condition.However, older children adapted their behavior more flexibly between conditions to parallel the strategies of their coplayers. These results support the utility of the Pizzagame as a feasible, reliable, and valid instrument for assessing and quantifying child and adolescent cooperative behavior. Moreover, these findings extend previous work showing that age influences cooperative behavior in the PGG.

show abstract

“…To develop these habits, they propose to focus on brain plasticity, where "the brain reads habits as predictable courses of action, and it eventually builds new bridges to anticipate habits" (Hamowy and Conigliaro, 2016, p. 28), and over time, this may improve the financial decision-making process by processing new information associated with the economic fundamentals. Hence, improving the way individuals take a financial decision by iterative steps can be done by focusing on brain plasticity (Leipold et al, 2013). This will be explained in detail in Section 3.…”

Section: Market Plasticitymentioning

confidence: 99%

A fresh look on financial decision-making from the plasticity perspective

Erkut

Kaya

Lehmann-Waffenschmidt

et al. 2018

International Journal of Ethics and Systems

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to propose an integrative framework bringing together results from neuroplasticity and decision-making from a neuroscience perspective with those from market plasticity, i.e. with which practices market actors shape markets.Design/methodology/approach -Provided that developments in neuroscience indicate that training the brain for orientation toward efficient decision-making processes under uncertainty is possible, an in-depth analysis can be conducted by using the integrative framework, which was set up by the authors for advancing research efforts in neuroeconomics and neurofinance on these lines.Findings -Markets have a plastic character; they can change shape and form and remain in that way thereafter. The marketers have always been causing this change to succeed in their marketing strategies and efforts. Plasticity, hitherto considered by marketing, market sociology and evolutionary economics, has a potential in financial decision-making processes, especially regarding its role in training the brain for stable financial decisions.Research limitations/implications -The theoretical approach can be incorporated for delivering an alternative representation of the knowledge processes associated with financial decisions.Practical implications -The practical approach can be used for improving the practical aspects of financial decision-making processes.Originality/value -The contribution is the first of its kind which integrates neuroscience approaches of plasticity and decision-making with the concept of market plasticity from the literature on economics and management, showing their similarities and opening a new front of discussion on how these two approaches can learn from each other to increase the explanatory power of financial decision-making processes and to gain new insights for financial decision makers on how to make more efficient financial decisions in the times of uncertainty.

show abstract

Individual and developmental differences in the relationship between preferences and theory of mind.

Cited by 5 publications

References 40 publications

Conditional Cooperation and the Marginal per Capita Return in Public Good Games

Conditional Cooperation and the Marginal per Capita Return in Public Good Games

The Pizzagame: A virtual public goods game to assess cooperative behavior in children and adolescents

A fresh look on financial decision-making from the plasticity perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About