Mind the framing when studying social preferences in the domain of losses

Antinyan Armenak, Corazzini Luca, Fišar Miloš, Reggiani Tommaso
{"title":"Mind the framing when studying social preferences in the domain of losses","authors":"Antinyan Armenak, Corazzini Luca, Fišar Miloš, Reggiani Tommaso","doi":"10.5817/wp_muni_econ_2022-11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There has been an increasing interest in altruistic behaviour in the domain of losses recently. Nevertheless, there is no consensus in whether the monetary losses make individuals more generous or more selfish. Although almost all relevant studies rely on a dictator game to study altruistic behaviour, the experimental designs of these studies differ in how the losses are framed, which may explain the diverging findings. Utilizing a dictator game, this paper studies the impact of loss framing on altruism. The main methodological result is that the dictators’ prosocial behaviour is sensitive to the loss frame they are embedded in. More specifically, in a dictator game in which the dictators have to share a loss between themselves and a recipient, the monetary allocations of the dictators are more benevolent than in a standard setting without a loss and in a dictator game in which the dictators have to share what remains of their endowments after a loss. These differences are explained by the different social norms that the respective loss frames invoke.","PeriodicalId":188529,"journal":{"name":"MUNI ECON Working Papers","volume":"09 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MUNI ECON Working Papers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/wp_muni_econ_2022-11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

There has been an increasing interest in altruistic behaviour in the domain of losses recently. Nevertheless, there is no consensus in whether the monetary losses make individuals more generous or more selfish. Although almost all relevant studies rely on a dictator game to study altruistic behaviour, the experimental designs of these studies differ in how the losses are framed, which may explain the diverging findings. Utilizing a dictator game, this paper studies the impact of loss framing on altruism. The main methodological result is that the dictators’ prosocial behaviour is sensitive to the loss frame they are embedded in. More specifically, in a dictator game in which the dictators have to share a loss between themselves and a recipient, the monetary allocations of the dictators are more benevolent than in a standard setting without a loss and in a dictator game in which the dictators have to share what remains of their endowments after a loss. These differences are explained by the different social norms that the respective loss frames invoke.
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
在研究损失领域的社会偏好时,请注意框架
最近,人们对损失领域的利他行为越来越感兴趣。然而,对于金钱损失是使个人更慷慨还是更自私,人们并没有达成共识。尽管几乎所有相关研究都依赖于独裁者游戏来研究利他行为,但这些研究的实验设计在损失的框架上有所不同,这可能解释了不同的发现。利用一个独裁者博弈,研究了损失框架对利他行为的影响。主要的方法论结果是,独裁者的亲社会行为对他们所处的损失框架很敏感。更具体地说,在独裁者游戏中,独裁者必须在他们自己和接受者之间分担损失,独裁者的货币分配比没有损失的标准设置更仁慈,在独裁者游戏中,独裁者必须在损失后分享他们的剩余禀赋。这些差异是由各自的损失框架所引发的不同社会规范所解释的。
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
Life Dissatisfaction and Anxiety in COVID-19 pandemic Narratives on migration and political polarization: How the emphasis in narratives can drive us apart Empirical investigation into market power, markups and employment Group identification and giving: in-group love, out-group hate and their crowding out Residential-based discrimination in the labor market
×
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:481959085
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