Minimal Social Cues in the Dictator Game

Rigdon, Mary and Ishii, Keiko and Watabe, Motoki and Kitayama, Shinobu (2008): Minimal Social Cues in the Dictator Game.

Abstract

This paper reports results of an incentivized laboratory experiment manipulating an extremely weak social cue in the Dictator Game. Prior to making their decision, we present dictators with a simple visual stimlulus: either three dots in a “watching-eyes” configuration, or three dots in a neutral configuration. The watching-eyes configuration is suggestive of a schematic face—a stimuli that is known to weakly activate the fusiform face area of the brain (Tong, et al., 2000; Bednar and Miikkulainen, 2003; Johnson and Morton, 1991). Given the experimental evidence for automatic priming of watching eyes of others, it is thus reasonable to hypothesize that even though the social cue is very weak, this activation might be sufficient to produce a significant change in social behavior. Our results demonstrate that such a weak social cue does increase giving behavior—even under conditions of complete anonymity—and this difference in behavior across subjects is entirely explained by differences in the choice behavior of males. In fact, males in our treatment condition, who typically act more selfishly than do females in conditions of complete anonymity, give twice as much to anonymous recipients than females give.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: dictator game, social preferences, laboratory experiment, social distance
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C70 - General; D - Microeconomics > D0 - General > D01 - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

References

Andreoni J, Brown E, and Rischall I (2003) Charitable giving by married couples: Who decides and why does it matter? Journal of Human Resources 38:111–133. Andreoni J and Vesterlund L (2001) Which is the fair sex? Gender differences in altruism Quarterly Journal of Economics 116(1): 292–312. Bateson M, Nettle D, and Roberts G (2006) Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting Biology Letters 2(3): 412–414. Bednar J and Miikkulainen R (2003) Learning innate face preferences Neural Computation 15(7): 1525–1557. Bohnet I and Frey B (1999a) The sound of silence in prisoner’s dilemma and dictator games Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 38: 43–57. Bohnet I and Frey B (1999b) Social distance and other-regarding behavior: Comment Amer- ican Economic Review 89: 335–340. Bolton G and Katok E (1995) An experimental test for gender differences in beneficent be- havior Economics Letters 48: 287–292. Bra˜ nas-Garza P (2005) Promoting helping behavior with framing in dictator games Journal of Economic Psychology 28: 477–486. Buchan N, Croson R and Johnson E (2001) Trust, reciprocity, altruism: An international experiment, Working Paper. Buchan N, Johnson E, and Croson R (2006) Let’s get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 60(3): 373–398. Burnham T (2003) Engineering altruism: A theoretical and experimental investigation of anonymity and gift giving Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 50: 133–144. Burnham T and Hare B (in press) Engineering cooperation: Does involuntary neural activa- tion increase public goods contributions? Human Nature. Burnham T, McCabe K, and Smith V L (2000) Friend-or-foe intentionality priming in an extensive form trust game Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1244: 1–17. Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral Game Theory Princeton University Press. Carter J and Irons M (1991) Are economists different, and if so, why? Journal of Economic Perspectives 5(2): 171–177. Cason T N and Mui V (1997) A laboratory study of group polarization in the team dictator game, Economic Journal 107: 1465–1483. Charness G and Gneezy U (2007) What’s in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 63(1): 88– 103. Charness G, Haruvy E and Sonsino D (2007) Social distance and reciprocity: The internet vs. the laboratory Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 63(1): 88–103. Cross S and Madson L (1997) Models of the self: Self-construals and gender Psychological Bul letin 122: 5–37. Cross S, Bacon P, and Morris M (2000) The relational–interdependent self–construal and relationships Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78: 791–808. Duffy J and Kornienko T (2007) Does competition affect giving? Working Paper. Dufwenberg M and Muren A (2006) Generosity, anonymity, gender Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 61(1): 42–49. Eckel C and Grossman P (1998) Are women less selfish than men? Evidence from dictator experiments Economic Journal 108: 726–735. Eckel C and Grossman P (1996) Altruism in anonymous dictator games Games and Economic Behavior 16: 181–191. Forsythe R, Horwitz J, Savin NE, and Sefton M (1994) Fairness in simple bargaining experi- ments Games and Economic Behavior 6: 347–369. Frank RH, Gilovich T and Regan DT (1993) Does studying economics inhibit cooperation? Journal of Economic Perspectives 7(2): 159–171. Frank B and Schulze G (2000) Does economics make citizens corrupt? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 43(1): 101–113. Giving USA Foundation, 2006, Annual Report. Haley K J and Fessler D (2005) Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous dictator game Evolution and Human Behavior, forthcoming. Henrich J, Boyd R, Bowles S, Camerer C, Fehr E, and Gintis H (2004) Foundations of Hu- man Sociality: Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Smal l-Scale Societies. Oxford University Press. Henrich J and Henrich N (2006) Culture, evolution, and the puzzle of human cooperation Cognitive Systems Research 7: 220–245. Henrich J, McElreath R, Barr A, Ensminger J, Barrett C, Bolyanatz A, Cardenas J C, Gur- ven M, Gwako E, Henrich N, Lesorogol C, Marlowe F, Tracer D, Ziker J (2006) Costly punishment across human societies Science 312: 1767–1770. Hoffman E, McCabe K, Shachat K, and Smith V (1994) Preferences, property rights, and anonymity in bargaining games Games and Economic Behavior 7: 346–380. Hoffman E, McCabe K, Smith V (1996) Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games American Economic Review 86: 653–660. Ishii K and Kurzban R (in press) Real time public goods in Japan: Cultural and individual differences in trust and reciprocity Human Nature: An Interdisciplinary Biosocial Perspec- tive. Johnson M and Morton J (1991) Biology and cognitive development: The case of face recog- nition (Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell). Kitayama S and Imada T (in press) Defending cultural self: A dual-process model of agency. In T. Urdan & M. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement, Vol. 15 (Elsevier Press). Krupka E and Weber R (2006) The focusing and informational effects of norms on pro-social behavior. Working Paper, Carnegie Mellon University. List J (2007) On the interpretation of giving in dictator games Journal of Political Economy 115(3): 482–493. Marwell G and Ames R (1981) Economists free ride, does anyone else? Experiments on the provision of public goods Journal of Public Economics 15: 295–310. Rigdon M (2003) Dictator games in L. Nadel (ed.) Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, London: MacMillan, pp. 209–210. Schurter K and Wilson B (2007) Justice and fairness in the dictator game, Working Paper. Shariff A F and Norenzayan A (2007) God is watching you: Priming God increases prosocial behavior in an anonymous dictator game Psychological Science 18(9): 803–809. Selten R, Ockenfels A (1998) An experimental solidarity game Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 34: 517–539. Tong F, Nakayama K, Moscovitch M, Weinrib O, and Kanwisher N (2000) Response properties of the human fusiform face area Cognitive Neuropsychology 17: 257–279. Vesterlund L (2006) Why do People Give? In Richard Steinberg and Walter W. Powell (Eds.), The Nonprofit Sector, 2nd edition, New Jersey: Yale University Press.