Mine or ours? Unintended framing effects in dictator games

IF 1.3 4区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY Rationality and Society Pub Date : 2022-01-11 DOI:10.1177/10434631211073326
Andreas Bergh, P. Wichardt
{"title":"Mine or ours? Unintended framing effects in dictator games","authors":"Andreas Bergh, P. Wichardt","doi":"10.1177/10434631211073326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports results from a classroom dictator game comparing the effects of three different sets of standard instructions. The results show that seemingly small and typically unreported differences in standard instructions induce different perceptions regarding entitlement and ownership of the money to be distributed, and that these perceptions influence behaviour. Less is given when the task is described as a task of generosity and more when the task is a task of distribution (average 35% vs. 52%). The results can contribute to explaining the large variation in dictator game giving reported in the literature and show that even small and unreported differences in instructions change how the game is perceived. JEL codes: C70; C91; D63","PeriodicalId":47079,"journal":{"name":"Rationality and Society","volume":"34 1","pages":"78 - 95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rationality and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10434631211073326","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reports results from a classroom dictator game comparing the effects of three different sets of standard instructions. The results show that seemingly small and typically unreported differences in standard instructions induce different perceptions regarding entitlement and ownership of the money to be distributed, and that these perceptions influence behaviour. Less is given when the task is described as a task of generosity and more when the task is a task of distribution (average 35% vs. 52%). The results can contribute to explaining the large variation in dictator game giving reported in the literature and show that even small and unreported differences in instructions change how the game is perceived. JEL codes: C70; C91; D63
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
我的还是我们的?独裁者游戏中的意外框架效应
本文报告了一个课堂独裁者游戏的结果,比较了三组不同标准指令的效果。结果表明,标准指令中看似微小且通常未报告的差异会引发对待分配资金的权利和所有权的不同看法,这些看法会影响行为。当任务被描述为慷慨的任务时,给出的更少,而当任务是分配的任务时(平均35%对52%),给出的更多。研究结果有助于解释文献中报道的独裁者游戏给出的巨大差异,并表明即使是指令上的微小和未报告的差异也会改变游戏的感知方式。JEL代码:C70;C91;D63
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Rationality & Society focuses on the growing contributions of rational-action based theory, and the questions and controversies surrounding this growth. Why Choose Rationality and Society? The trend toward ever-greater specialization in many areas of intellectual life has lead to fragmentation that deprives scholars of the ability to communicate even in closely adjoining fields. The emergence of the rational action paradigm as the inter-lingua of the social sciences is a remarkable exception to this trend. It is the one paradigm that offers the promise of bringing greater theoretical unity across disciplines such as economics, sociology, political science, cognitive psychology, moral philosophy and law.
期刊最新文献
Does improved upward social mobility foster frustration and conflict? A large-scale online experiment testing Boudon’s model Effectiveness of technology for braille literacy education for children: a systematic review. Refined tastes, coarse tastes: Solving the stratification-of-goods enigma Explaining mobilization for revolts by private interests and kinship relations Graduated sanctioning, endogenous institutions and sustainable cooperation in common-pool resources: An experimental test
×
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