Suchergebnisse

Abstract. Donors' social class may provide cues for others to judge their underlying motives and prosociality. We test whether donors' social class affects their prosocial reputation through perceived authentic motivation. Across four studies, we find that low-class donors are perceived as more authentically motivated to care about others' welfare, and thus gain more prosocial reputation as a benevolent person, compared to high-class donors. Moreover, prosocial impact salience moderates this effect: When donation is equal in the percentage of donors' annual income, making the prosocial impact of donors' contribution salient enhances high-class donors' perceived authentic motivation and prosocial reputation to the same levels as those of low-class donors. These findings provide important insights into how to design efficient fundraising events or platforms.

AbstractDisparities in socioeconomic status (SES) may affect individuals' risk preferences, which have important developmental consequences across the lifespan. Yet, previous research has shown inconsistent associations between SES and risky decision‐making, and little is known about how this link develops from a young age. The current research is among the first to examine how SES influences preschoolers' risky decisions in both gain and loss frames. Across two studies, children aged 5 to 6 years (total N = 309, 154 boys) were asked to choose between certain and risky options. The risky option was more advantageous, equal to, or less advantageous than the certain option. Study 1 revealed that in the loss frame, high‐SES children (n = 84, 44 boys) chose more risky options and were more sensitive to the expected value compared to low‐SES children (n = 78, 42 boys), especially when the risk was more advantageous. However, this SES difference was not significant in the gain frame. Supporting the potential causal link between SES and risky decision‐making, Study 2 further found that experimentally increasing low‐SES children's (n = 68, 30 boys) status by providing additional resources increased their risk‐seeking behavior in the loss frame. Overall, our findings suggest an interaction between environmental cues (gain vs. loss) and early life circumstances (SES) in shaping children's risk preferences.Research Highlights
This research is among the first to examine how school backgrounds and experimentally manipulated SES influence preschoolers' risk preferences in gain and loss frames.
Children were more risk‐seeking for losses than for gains; this framing effect was stronger in higher‐SES than lower‐SES children.
Lower‐SES children exhibited fewer risk‐seeking behaviors and decreased sensitivity to the expected value of options for losses, but not for gains.
A temporary boost in SES increased children's risk‐seeking behavior, but not sensitivity to expected values.

In this research, we examine how cooperation emerges and develops in sequential dyadic interactions when the initial interaction varies in strategic considerations (i.e., fear of partner rejection) or potential gossip by one's partner that may affect subsequent interactions. In a lab experiment involving real-time interactions (N = 240) across 39 sessions, participants acted in different roles (i.e., Person A, B, and C) in two different games-Person A was first assigned to allocate an amount of resource to Person B in a dictator game or an ultimatum game. Afterward, Person C interacted with Person A (i.e., trustee) as a trustor in a trust game. Prior to their decisions, participants (a) learned that Person B could gossip by sending evaluations about Person A's behavior to Person C prior to the trust game or (b) did not receive this information. Findings replicate previous research showing that potential gossip by one's partner greatly increases cooperation that is revealed in the resources allocated to the partner. Yet, compared to the dictator game, the presence of strategic considerations in the ultimatum game does not significantly enhance cooperation, and even makes people less likely to reciprocate others' behavior in the subsequent interaction. Interestingly, when there is no gossip, those who have played the ultimatum game, compared to the dictator game, are more trusted by others but do not vary in reciprocity in the subsequent interaction. However, when there is gossip, those who have played the dictator game, compared to the ultimatum game, are more trusted and also more likely to reciprocate others' behavior in the subsequent interaction. These findings imply that gossip invariably promotes cooperation across strategic and non-strategic situations, but the potential rejection by one's partner weakly promotes cooperation, and even undermines future cooperation especially when paired with reputation sharing opportunities. We discuss the implications of these findings for implementing reputation systems that can promote and maintain cooperation cost-effectively.

Theories suggest that political ideology relates to cooperation, with conservatives being more likely to pursue selfish outcomes, and liberals more likely to pursue egalitarian outcomes. In study 1, we examine how political ideology and political party affiliation (Republican vs. Democrat) predict cooperation with a partner who self-identifies as Republican or Democrat in two samples before (n = 362) and after (n = 366) the 2012 US presidential election. Liberals show slightly more concern for their partners' outcomes compared to conservatives (study 1), and in study 2 this relation is supported by a meta-analysis (r =.15). However, in study 1, political ideology did not relate to cooperation in general. Both Republicans and Democrats extend more cooperation to their in-group relative to the out-group, and this is explained by expectations of cooperation from in-group versus out-group members. We discuss the relation between political ideology and cooperation within and between groups.

Theories suggest that political ideology relates to cooperation, with conservatives being more likely to pursue selfish outcomes, and liberals more likely to pursue egalitarian outcomes. In study 1, we examine how political ideology and political party affiliation (Republican vs. Democrat) predict cooperation with a partner who self-identifies as Republican or Democrat in two samples before ( n = 362) and after ( n = 366) the 2012 US presidential election. Liberals show slightly more concern for their partners' outcomes compared to conservatives (study 1), and in study 2 this relation is supported by a meta-analysis ( r = .15). However, in study 1, political ideology did not relate to cooperation in general. Both Republicans and Democrats extend more cooperation to their in-group relative to the out-group, and this is explained by expectations of cooperation from in-group versus out-group members. We discuss the relation between political ideology and cooperation within and between groups.

Theories suggest that political ideology relates to cooperation, with conservatives being more likely to pursue selfish outcomes, and liberals more likely to pursue egalitarian outcomes. In study 1, we examine how political ideology and political party affiliation (Republican vs. Democrat) predict cooperation with a partner who self-identifies as Republican or Democrat in two samples before (n = 362) and after (n = 366) the 2012 US presidential election. Liberals show slightly more concern for their partners' outcomes compared to conservatives (study 1), and in study 2 this relation is supported by a meta-analysis (r = .15). However, in study 1, political ideology did not relate to cooperation in general. Both Republicans and Democrats extend more cooperation to their in-group relative to the out-group, and this is explained by expectations of cooperation from in-group versus out-group members. We discuss the relation between political ideology and cooperation within and between groups.