Social distance decreases responders' sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game

Hyunji Kim, Simone Schnall, Do Joon Yi, Mathew P. White

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Studies using the Ultimatum Game have shown that participants reject unfair offers extended by another person although this incurs a financial cost. Previous research suggests that one possible explanation for this apparently selfdefeating response is that unfair offers involve strong negative responses that decrease the chances of responders accepting offers that would objectively constitute a net profit. We tested the hypothesis that one way of reducing responders' rejections of unfair offers is through increased psychological distance, so that participants move away from the concrete feeling of being unfairly treated. Social distance was manipulated by having participants play the Ultimatum Game either for themselves, or for another person. Compared to deciding for one's self or a close social contact, participants showed less sensitivity to fairness when deciding for a stranger, as indicated by fewer rejected unfair offers. We suggest that social distance helps people move beyond immediate fairness concerns in the Ultimatum Game.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)632-638
Number of pages7
JournalJudgment and Decision Making
Volume8
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Sep 1

Fingerprint

Social Distance
Emotions
Psychology
Costs and Cost Analysis
Research
Social distance
Ultimatum game
Fairness
Rejection (Psychology)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Decision Sciences(all)
  • Applied Psychology

Cite this

Kim, Hyunji ; Schnall, Simone ; Yi, Do Joon ; White, Mathew P. / Social distance decreases responders' sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game. In: Judgment and Decision Making. 2013 ; Vol. 8, No. 5. pp. 632-638.
@article{351a4e2113af4122ac4fc703e21fca76,
title = "Social distance decreases responders' sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game",
abstract = "Studies using the Ultimatum Game have shown that participants reject unfair offers extended by another person although this incurs a financial cost. Previous research suggests that one possible explanation for this apparently selfdefeating response is that unfair offers involve strong negative responses that decrease the chances of responders accepting offers that would objectively constitute a net profit. We tested the hypothesis that one way of reducing responders' rejections of unfair offers is through increased psychological distance, so that participants move away from the concrete feeling of being unfairly treated. Social distance was manipulated by having participants play the Ultimatum Game either for themselves, or for another person. Compared to deciding for one's self or a close social contact, participants showed less sensitivity to fairness when deciding for a stranger, as indicated by fewer rejected unfair offers. We suggest that social distance helps people move beyond immediate fairness concerns in the Ultimatum Game.",
author = "Hyunji Kim and Simone Schnall and Yi, {Do Joon} and White, {Mathew P.}",
year = "2013",
month = "9",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "632--638",
journal = "Judgment and Decision Making",
issn = "1930-2975",
publisher = "Society for Judgment and Decision Making",
number = "5",

}

Social distance decreases responders' sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game. / Kim, Hyunji; Schnall, Simone; Yi, Do Joon; White, Mathew P.

In: Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 8, No. 5, 01.09.2013, p. 632-638.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Social distance decreases responders' sensitivity to fairness in the ultimatum game

AU - Kim, Hyunji

AU - Schnall, Simone

AU - Yi, Do Joon

AU - White, Mathew P.

PY - 2013/9/1

Y1 - 2013/9/1

N2 - Studies using the Ultimatum Game have shown that participants reject unfair offers extended by another person although this incurs a financial cost. Previous research suggests that one possible explanation for this apparently selfdefeating response is that unfair offers involve strong negative responses that decrease the chances of responders accepting offers that would objectively constitute a net profit. We tested the hypothesis that one way of reducing responders' rejections of unfair offers is through increased psychological distance, so that participants move away from the concrete feeling of being unfairly treated. Social distance was manipulated by having participants play the Ultimatum Game either for themselves, or for another person. Compared to deciding for one's self or a close social contact, participants showed less sensitivity to fairness when deciding for a stranger, as indicated by fewer rejected unfair offers. We suggest that social distance helps people move beyond immediate fairness concerns in the Ultimatum Game.

AB - Studies using the Ultimatum Game have shown that participants reject unfair offers extended by another person although this incurs a financial cost. Previous research suggests that one possible explanation for this apparently selfdefeating response is that unfair offers involve strong negative responses that decrease the chances of responders accepting offers that would objectively constitute a net profit. We tested the hypothesis that one way of reducing responders' rejections of unfair offers is through increased psychological distance, so that participants move away from the concrete feeling of being unfairly treated. Social distance was manipulated by having participants play the Ultimatum Game either for themselves, or for another person. Compared to deciding for one's self or a close social contact, participants showed less sensitivity to fairness when deciding for a stranger, as indicated by fewer rejected unfair offers. We suggest that social distance helps people move beyond immediate fairness concerns in the Ultimatum Game.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84884961838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84884961838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 632

EP - 638

JO - Judgment and Decision Making

JF - Judgment and Decision Making

SN - 1930-2975

IS - 5

ER -