Taiwanese college students (N=101) participated in the study to examine the effects of the amount of an endowment, the tangibility of an endowment, and the certainty of the recipient on selfishness in a modified dictator game. Results showed that dictators were more selfish when allocating tangible (money) than less tangible (honor credits) endowments. Selfishness was higher when large amounts of money were involved. The certainty of the recipient was manipulated by whether the recipient was chosen and announced before or after the decision. Unexpectedly, participants were more self-interested in the certain-recipient condition than in the uncertain-recipient condition. In the honor condition, the amount of an endowment and the certainty of the recipient did not affect participants' allocations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BallietD.MulderL. B.Van LangeP. A. M. (2011) Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 594–615.
2.
Ben-NerA.KongF.PuttermanL. (2004) Share and share alike? Gender-pairing, personality, and cognitive ability as determinants of giving. Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, 581–589.
3.
Ben-NerA.KramerA.LevyO. (2008) Economic and hypothetical dictator game experiments: Incentive effects at the individual level. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 1775–1784.
4.
Ben-NerA.McCallB. P.StephaneM.WangH. (2009) Identity and in-group/out-group differentiation in work and giving behaviors: Experimental evidence. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72, 153–170.
5.
BohnetI.FreyB. S. (1999) Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games: Comment. The American Economic Review, 89(1), 335–339.
6.
Brañas-GarzaP. (2006) Poverty in dictator games: Awakening solidarity. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 60, 306–320.
7.
Brañas-GarzaP. (2007) Promoting helping behavior with framing in dictator games. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28, 477–486.
8.
Brañas-GarzaP.Cobo-ReyesR.EspinosaM.JiménezN.KováříkJ.PontiG. (2010) Altruism and social integration. Games & Economic Behavior, 69, 249–257.
9.
BrileyD. A.MorrisM. W.SimonsonI. (2000) Reasons as carriers of culture: Dynamic vs dispositional models of cultural influence on decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 157–178.
10.
BurnhamT. C. (2003) Engineering altruism: A theoretical and experimental investigation of anonymity and gift giving. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 50, 133–144.
11.
CamererC. F. (2003) Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer. Press. Pp. 43–117.
12.
CarpenterJ.VerhoogenE.BurksS. (2005) The effect of stakes in distribution experiments. Economics Letters, 86, 393–398.
13.
CharnessG.GneezyU. (2008) What's in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68, 29–35.
14.
CherryT. L.FrykblomP.ShogrenJ. F. (2002) Hardnose the dictator. American Economic Review, 92(4), 1218–1221.
15.
ChuiA. C. W.KwokC. C. Y. (2008) National culture and life insurance consumption. Journal of International Business Studies, 39, 88–101.
16.
ChuiA. C. W.TitmanS.WeiK. C. (2010) Individualism and momentum around the world. Journal of Finance, 65, 361–392.
17.
CohenJ. (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18.
DanaJ.CainD. M.DawesR. M. (2006) What you don't know won't hurt me: Costly (but quiet) exit in dictator games. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 100, 193–201.
19.
EasterlinR. A. (2005) Diminishing marginal utility of income? Caveat emptor. Social Indicators Research, 70, 243–255.
20.
EngelC. (2011) Dictator games: A meta study. Experimental Economics, 14, 583–610.
21.
FischerR.SmithP.B. (2003) Reward allocation and culture: A meta-analysis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 251–268.
22.
ForsytheR.HorowitzJ. L.SavinN. E.SeftonM. (1994) Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6, 347–369.
23.
FrankR. H. (2010) Microeconomics and behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Pp. 169–210.
24.
GinoF.PierceL. (2009) The abundance effect: Unethical behavior in the presence of wealth. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 142–155.
25.
GómezC.KirkmanB. L.ShapiroD. L. (2000) The impact of collectivism and in-group/out-group membership on the evaluation generosity of team members. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), 1097–1106.
26.
HoffmanE.McCabeK.ShachatK.SmithV. (1994) Preferences, property right, and anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic Behavior, 7, 346–380.
27.
HoffmanE.McCabeK.SmithV. L. (1996) Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. American Economic Review, 86(3), 653–660.
28.
JohnsonM. W.BickelW. K. (2002) Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 77, 129–146.
29.
KauderE. (1965) A history of marginal utility theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer. Press. Pp. 30–41.
30.
KochK. A.NormannH-T. (2008) Giving in dictator games: Regard for others or regard by others?Southern Economic Journal, 75(1), 223–231.
31.
KühvergerA.Schulte-MecklenbeckM.PernerJ. (2002) Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 1162–1175.
32.
LeiderS.MöbiusM.RosenblatT.DoQ. A. (2009) Directed altruism and enforced reciprocity in social networks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124, 1815–1851.
33.
LeungK. (1988) Some determinants of conflict avoidance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 19(1), 125–136.
34.
LeungK.BondM. H. (1984) The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(4), 793–804.
35.
LoceyM. L.JonesB. A.RachlinH. (2011) Real and hypothetical rewards in selfcontrol and social discounting. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 552–564.
36.
MaslowA. (1954) Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
37.
NisbettR. E.PengK.ChoiI.NorenzayanA., (2001) Culture and systems of thought: Holistic vs analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108, 291–310.
38.
NowakM. A. (2006) Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314, 1560–1563.
39.
OxobyR. J.SpraggonJ. (2008) Mine and yours: Property rights in dictator games. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 65, 703–713.
40.
OysermanD.CoonH. M.KemmelmeierM. (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.
41.
RachlinH.JonesB. A. (2008) Altruism among relatives and non-relatives. Behavioural Processes, 79, 120–123.
42.
RigdonM.IshiiK.WatabeM.KitayamaS. (2009) Minimal social cues in the dictator game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 358–367.
43.
Rodriguez-LaraI.Moreno-GarridoL. (2012) Self-interest and fairness: Self-serving choices of justice principles. Experimental Economics, 15, 158–175.
44.
SmallD. A.LoewensteinG. (2003) Helping a victim or helping the victim: Altruism and identifiability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26, 5–16.
45.
SmallD. A.LoewensteinG. (2005) The devil you know: The effects of identifiability on punishment. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 311–318.
46.
TanH. B.ForgasJ. P. (2010) When happiness makes us selfish, but sadness makes us fair: Affective influences on interpersonal strategies in the dictator game. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 571–576.
47.
TriandisH. C. (1995) Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Pp. 43–80.
48.
VohsK. D.MeadN. L.GoodeM. R. (2006) The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314, 1154–1156.
49.
WongR. Y.HongY. (2005) Dynamic influences of culture on cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma. Psychological Science, 16(6), 429–434.
50.
YingH. K.TsaiY. M.ChenL. H. (2008) Relationships between being traditional and sense of gratitude among Taiwanese high school athletes. Psychological Reports, 102, 920–926.
