Existing stereotypes about Black Americans may influence perceptions of intent during financial negotiations. In this study, we explored whether the influence of race on economic decisions extends to choices that are costly to the decision maker. We investigated whether racial group membership contributes to differential likelihood of rejection of objectively equal unfair monetary offers. In the Ultimatum Game, players accept or reject proposed splits of money. Players keep accepted splits, but if a player rejects an offer, both the player and the proposer receive nothing. We found that participants accepted more offers and lower offer amounts from White proposers than from Black proposers, and that this pattern was accentuated for participants with higher implicit race bias. These findings indicate that participants are willing to discriminate against Black proposers even at a cost to their own financial gain.
BeckerG. S. (1978). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2.
BoltonG. E.ZwickR. (1995). Anonymity versus punishment in ultimatum bargaining. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 95–121. doi:10.1006/game.1995.1026
3.
BrewerM. B. (1979). In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 307–324.
4.
CamererC. F.LoewensteinG. (2004). Behavioral economics: Past, present, future. In CamererC. F.LoewensteinG.RabinM. (Eds.), Advances in behavioral economics (pp. 3–51). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
DawesR. M.ThalerR. H. (1988). Anomalies: Cooperation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(3), 187–197.
6.
DiekmannK. A.SamuelsS. M.RossL.BazermanM. H. (1997). Self-interest and fairness in problems of resource allocation: Allocators versus recipients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1061–1074.
7.
DotschR.WigboldusD. H. J.LangnerO.van KnippenbergA. (2008). Ethnic out-group faces are biased in the prejudiced mind. Psychological Science, 19, 978–980. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02186.x
8.
DovidioJ. F.BrighamJ. C.JohnsonB. T.GaertnerS. L. (1996). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination: Another look. In MacraeC. N.StangorC.HewstoneM. (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 276–292). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9.
DownsA. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
10.
FirthD. (1993). Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika, 80, 27–38.
11.
GreenA. R.CarneyD. R.PallinD. J.NgoL. H.RaymondK. L.IezzoniL. I.BanajiM. R. (2007). Implicit bias among physicians and its prediction of thrombolysis decisions for Black and White patients. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 22, 1231–1238. doi:10.1007/s11606-007-0258-5
12.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.197
13.
JettenJ.SpearsR.MansteadA. S. R. (1996). Intergroup norms and intergroup discrimination: Distinctive self-categorization and social identity effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1222–1233.
14.
JostJ. T.AzziA. E. (1996). Microjustice and macrojustice in the allocation of resources between experimental groups. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 349–365.
15.
KahnemanD.TverskyA. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–292.
16.
KahnemanD.TverskyA. (Eds.). (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
17.
LaneK. A.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: What we know (so far) about the method. In WittenbrinkB.SchwarzN. (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 59–102). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
18.
LoewensteinG.LernerJ. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In DavidsonR.GoldsmithH.SchererK. (Eds.), Handbook of affective science (pp. 619–642). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
19.
NosekB. A.BanajiM. R.GreenwaldA. G. (2002). Harvesting intergroup attitudes and stereotypes from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 101–115.
20.
NosekB. A.SmythF. L.HansenJ. J.DevosT.LindnerN. M.RanganathK. A.. . . BanajiM. R. (2007). Pervasiveness and correlates of implicit attitudes and stereotypes. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 36–88. doi:10.1080/10463280701489053
21.
PillutlaM. M.MurnighanJ. K. (1996). Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 208–224.
22.
RoothD.-O. (2010). Automatic associations and discrimination in hiring: Real world evidence. Labour Economics, 17, 523–534. doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2009.04.005
23.
SabinJ. A.NosekB. A.GreenwaldA. G.RivaraF. P. (2009). Physicians’ implicit and explicit attitudes about race by MD race, ethnicity, and gender. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 20, 896–913. doi:10.1353/hpu.0.0185
24.
SanfeyA. G.RillingJ. K.AronsonJ. A.NystromL. E.CohenJ. D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 300, 1755–1758. doi:10.1126/science.1082976
25.
SeskoA. K.BiernatM. (2010). Prototypes of race and gender: The invisibility of Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 356–360.
26.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF.MitchellM. (1994). In-group identification, social dominance orientation, and differential intergroup social allocation. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 151–167.
27.
SnipesS.SellersS.TafawaA.CooperL.FieldsJ.BonhamV. (2011). Is race medically relevant? A qualitative study of physicians’ attitudes about the role of race in treatment decision-making. BMC Health Services Research, 11(1), 183. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/183
28.
StanleyD. A.Sokol-HessnerP.BanajiM. R.PhelpsE. A. (2011). Implicit race attitudes predict trustworthiness judgments and economic trust decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 108, 7710–7715.
29.
TajfelH. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223, 96–102.
30.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. (Eds.), Psychology of inter-group relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson.
31.
ThalerR. H. (1988). Anomalies: The Ultimatum Game. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(4), 195–206.
32.
van ’t WoutM.KahnR. S.SanfeyA. G.AlemanA. (2006). Affective state and decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Experimental Brain Research, 169, 564–568. doi:10.1007/s00221-006-0346-5
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
