Other-Regarding Preferences and Social Norms

Lynn A. Stout
{"title":"Other-Regarding Preferences and Social Norms","authors":"Lynn A. Stout","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.265902","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legal scholars have become keenly interested in behavioral approaches to law that recognize that real people do not always behave in a rationally selfish fashion. For example, numerous recent papers examine how human choice can be distorted by endowment effects, anchoring effects, availability biases, and other cognitive deficiencies. There is a curious imbalance to this \"behavioral law and economics\" literature, however. Contemporary critiques of the rational selfishness model of human behavior tend to focus far more on the first modifier - the assumption of rationality - than on second - the assumption of self interest. This essay reverses that emphasis. It argues that the human tendency to act in an other-regarding fashion (to sacrifice in order to help or harm others) is far more pervasive, powerful, and important than generally recognized. In support of this claim, it reviews the extensive empirical evidence that has been accumulated over the past four decades on human behavior in social dilemma games, ultimatum games, and dictator games. This evidence establishes that in the right circumstances, experimental subjects routinely behave as if they care about costs and benefits to others. (In the parlance of economics, their behavior \"reveals\" other-regarding preferences.) Moreover, subjects' decisions to act in an other-regarding fashion seem driven primarily not by their own payoffs but by social context - their perceptions of what others believe, what others expect, and how others are likely to behave. These findings are important not only to our understanding of individual behavior, but also to our understanding of a wide variety of social institutions. To illustrate, this essay considers how the reality of socially-contingent, other-regarding behavior may offer insight into the nature and workings of social norms. In particular, it considers how the phenomenon of other-regarding preferences sheds light on a variety of questions that have been debated in the norms literature. These include the questions of what sorts of behaviors are most likely to solidify into norms; why people follow norms; and how policymakers and other \"norm entrepreneurs\" can best use norms to change behavior.","PeriodicalId":221633,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown University: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown University: Public Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.265902","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Legal scholars have become keenly interested in behavioral approaches to law that recognize that real people do not always behave in a rationally selfish fashion. For example, numerous recent papers examine how human choice can be distorted by endowment effects, anchoring effects, availability biases, and other cognitive deficiencies. There is a curious imbalance to this "behavioral law and economics" literature, however. Contemporary critiques of the rational selfishness model of human behavior tend to focus far more on the first modifier - the assumption of rationality - than on second - the assumption of self interest. This essay reverses that emphasis. It argues that the human tendency to act in an other-regarding fashion (to sacrifice in order to help or harm others) is far more pervasive, powerful, and important than generally recognized. In support of this claim, it reviews the extensive empirical evidence that has been accumulated over the past four decades on human behavior in social dilemma games, ultimatum games, and dictator games. This evidence establishes that in the right circumstances, experimental subjects routinely behave as if they care about costs and benefits to others. (In the parlance of economics, their behavior "reveals" other-regarding preferences.) Moreover, subjects' decisions to act in an other-regarding fashion seem driven primarily not by their own payoffs but by social context - their perceptions of what others believe, what others expect, and how others are likely to behave. These findings are important not only to our understanding of individual behavior, but also to our understanding of a wide variety of social institutions. To illustrate, this essay considers how the reality of socially-contingent, other-regarding behavior may offer insight into the nature and workings of social norms. In particular, it considers how the phenomenon of other-regarding preferences sheds light on a variety of questions that have been debated in the norms literature. These include the questions of what sorts of behaviors are most likely to solidify into norms; why people follow norms; and how policymakers and other "norm entrepreneurs" can best use norms to change behavior.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
他人偏好与社会规范
法律学者对法律的行为研究方法非常感兴趣,这些方法认识到真实的人并不总是以理性的自私方式行事。例如,许多最近的论文研究了人类的选择是如何被禀赋效应、锚定效应、可得性偏差和其他认知缺陷扭曲的。然而,这种“行为法则和经济学”的文献存在着一种奇怪的不平衡。当代对人类行为的理性自私模型的批评,往往更多地关注于第一个修饰词——理性假设——而不是第二个——自我利益假设。这篇文章颠覆了这一重点。它认为,人类倾向于以他人为中心的方式行事(为了帮助或伤害他人而牺牲),这种倾向远比人们普遍认为的要普遍、强大和重要得多。为了支持这一说法,它回顾了过去四十年来积累的关于人类在社会困境游戏、最后通牒游戏和独裁者游戏中的行为的广泛经验证据。这一证据表明,在适当的情况下,实验对象通常表现得好像他们关心他人的成本和利益。(用经济学的说法,他们的行为“揭示”了与他人相关的偏好。)此外,受试者以他人为中心的方式行事的决定似乎主要不是由他们自己的回报驱动的,而是由社会背景驱动的——他们对他人信仰的看法、他人的期望以及他人可能的行为方式。这些发现不仅对我们理解个体行为很重要,而且对我们理解各种各样的社会制度也很重要。为了说明这一点,本文考虑了社会偶然的、与他人有关的行为的现实如何提供对社会规范的本质和运作的见解。特别是,它考虑了与他人相关的偏好现象如何揭示了规范文献中争论的各种问题。这些问题包括:什么样的行为最有可能固化为规范;为什么人们会遵循规范;以及政策制定者和其他“规范企业家”如何最好地利用规范来改变行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Taxing Capital Income in Emerging Countries: Will FATCA Open the Door? Is Welching on Public Pension Promises an Option for Illinois? An Analysis of Article XIII, Section 5 of the Illinois Constitution Other-Regarding Preferences and Social Norms Shared Equity Housing: Cultural Understanding and the Meaning of Ownership
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1