Old age and prosocial behavior: Social preferences or experimental confounds?

Kettner, Sara Elisa; Waichman, Israel

doi:10.1016/j.joep.2016.01.003

Cited by 35 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, we do not find support for Hypothesis 1. Similarly, most other studies find no difference in framing of the action set [3,[6][7][8][9][10]. Since our result for the neutral setting is largely in line with most of the previous studies, approximate comparability in behavior across the subject pools can be assumed.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…This sensitivity is in line with experiments allowing for giving and taking simultaneously, meaning that subjects are sensitive to extending the choice set towards the possibility of taking endowment from the other player [4,5,34,45,46]. However, studies for which choice options remain isomorphic in GIVE and TAKE, as in this experiment, mostly find no difference between GIVE and TAKE [3,[6][7][8][9]13]. Regarding the hypothesized effects of larger allocation to the recipient in TAKE, this is not confirmed.…”

supporting

confidence: 64%

“…The allocation decisions, however, remain unaffected by the framing. In a similar manner, Kettner & Waichman [9] discover differences between experienced students, inexperienced students and elderly people in playing a dictator game, but they also do not identify any difference in framing. Most recently, Georg et al [10], compare the social framing of strategies in a dictator game to an equivalent version of a prisoner's dilemma.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Giving to versus Taking from In- and Out-Group Members

Alt

Gallier

Schlüter

et al. 2018

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this experiment, we test whether subjects' responses to variations in the action set in a dictator game depends on induced group identities. The action set includes choices in which the dictator can either give money to or take money from the other player. As an extension to the anonymous setting, we introduce induced group identities using the minimal group paradigm. Based on a dictator game conducted with more than 300 students in Indonesia, we implement a full factorial design in order to analyze the framing of the action set in a varied cultural context and to examine varied prevalence of social norms given a group identity context. If group identity is not salient, we find that participants are slightly more generous when they have an opportunity to give to rather than to take from the recipient. However, when participants are matched with in-group members, this result is reversed and highly significant. The result of differing responses to framing effects in within-group interactions compared to a neutral setting are largely ascribed to the varied compliance with existing social norms.1 Closely related to [4], List [5] investigates give and take options in a dictator game. However, the results are not covered here, as the choice set is not isomorphically.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

supporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Giving to versus Taking from In- and Out-Group Members

Alt

Gallier

Schlüter

et al. 2018

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since the dice is rolled privately, researchers cannot detect whether a given participant has lied or not. The only thing the researcher can do is to compare the distribution of reported outcomes with the random distribution, in order to deduce whether a significant 2 Previous research has mainly focus on the effect of demographic characteristics on social preferences (Bolton & Katok, 1995;Eckel & Grossman, 1998;Andreoni & Vesterlund, 2001;Fong, 2001;List, 2004;Dufwenberg & Muren, 2006;Houser and Schunk, 2006;Niederle and Vesterlund, 2007;Croson and Gneezy, 2009;Capraro, Jordan & Rand, 2014;Capraro & Marcelletti, 2014;Carlsson, Johansson-Stenman & Nam, 2014;Dreber et al, 2014;Capraro, 2015;Lin & Yu, 2015;Rieger & Mata, 2015;Brañas-Garza, Capraro & Rascón-Ramírez, 2016;Kettner & Waichman, 2016;Rand et al, 2016).…”

Section: Measure Of Honestymentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Lies? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Sex, Age, and Education on Honesty

Capraro¹

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As demographic variables are often associated with prosocial behavior in economic games [62,63], we examined the role of age and gender. Age was not correlated with allocations in either the giving or taking game (ps > 0.24).…”

Section: Game Allocationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Windfall Sharing to Property Ownership: Prosocial Personality Traits in Giving and Taking Dictator Games

Zhao

Kashima

Smillie

2018

Games

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dictator game is a well-known task measuring prosocial preferences, in which one person divides a fixed amount of windfall money with a recipient. A key factor in real-world transfers of wealth is the concept of property ownership and consequently the related acts of giving and taking. Using a variation of the traditional dictator game (N = 256), we examined whether individual differences under different game frames corresponded with prosocial personality traits from the Big Five (politeness, compassion) and HEXACO (Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, eXtraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness to Experience) (honesty-humility, agreeableness) models. In the Big Five model, the effects of prosocial personality traits were generally stronger and more consistent for taking than for giving, in line with a "do-no-harm" explanation, whereby prosocial individuals felt less entitled to and less willing to infringe on the endowments of others. In contrast, HEXACO honesty-humility predicted allocations across both frames, consistent with its broad association with fair-mindedness, and providing further evidence of its role in allocations of wealth more generally. These findings highlight the utility of integrating personality psychology with behavioral economics, in which the discriminant validity across prosocial traits can shed light on the distinct motivations underpinning social decisions.

show abstract

Old age and prosocial behavior: Social preferences or experimental confounds?

Cited by 35 publications

References 33 publications

Giving to versus Taking from In- and Out-Group Members

Giving to versus Taking from In- and Out-Group Members

Who Lies? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Sex, Age, and Education on Honesty

From Windfall Sharing to Property Ownership: Prosocial Personality Traits in Giving and Taking Dictator Games

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About