Growing evidence has highlighted the importance of social norms in promoting prosocial behaviors in economic games. Specifically, individual differences in norm adherence—captured by the politeness aspect of Big Five agreeableness—have been found to predict fair allocations of wealth to one’s partner in the dictator game. Yet, most studies have used neutrally framed paradigms, where players may default to norms of equality in the absence of contextual cues. In this study (N = 707), we examined prosocial personality traits and dictator allocations under salient real-world norms of equity and need. Extending on the previous research, we found that—in addition to politeness—the compassion aspect of agreeableness predicted greater allocations of wealth when they were embedded in real-world norms. These results represent an important step in understanding the real-world implications of laboratory-based research, demonstrating the importance of both normative context and prosocial traits.
AdamsJ. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York, NY: Academic Press.
2.
AguiarF.Brañas-GarzaP.MillerL. M. (2008). Moral distance in dictator games. Judgment and Decision Making, 3, 344–354.
3.
BandalosD. L.FinneyS. J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In MarcoulidesG. A.SchumackerR. E. (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modeling (pp. 269–296). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
BatsonC. D. (1991). The altruism question: Toward a social psychological answer. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
BatsonC. D. (2010). Empathy-induced altruistic motivation. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 15–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
6.
BatsonC. D.AhmadN. (2001). Empathy-induced altruism in a Prisoner’s Dilemma II: What if the target of empathy has defected?European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 25–36. doi:http://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.26
7.
BatsonC. D.DuncanB. D.AckermanP.BuckleyT.BirchK. (1981). Is empathic emotion a source of altruistic motivation?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 290–302. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.2.290
8.
BatsonC. D.MoranT. (1999). Empathy-induced altruism in a Prisoner’s Dilemma. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 909–924.
9.
BekkersR. (2006). Traditional and health-related philanthropy: The role of resources and personality. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69, 349–366.
10.
BoltonG. E.KatokE.ZwickR. (1998). Dictator game giving: Rules of fairness versus acts of kindness. International Journal of Game Theory, 27, 269–299. doi:http://doi.org/10.1007/s001820050072
11.
CamererC. F.FehrE. (2004). Measuring social norms and preferences using experimental games: A guide for social scientists. In HenrichJ.BoydR.BowlesS.CamererC.FehrE.GintisH. (Eds.), Foundations of human sociality: Economic experiments and ethnographic evidence from fifteen small-scale societies (pp. 55–95). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
CamererC. F.ThalerR. H. (1995). Anomalies: Ultimatums, dictators and manners. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 209–219.
13.
CappelenA. W.HoleA. D.SørensenE. Ø.TongoddenB. (2007). The pluralism of fairness ideals: An experimental approach. American Economic Review, 97, 818–827. doi:http://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.3.818
14.
CappelenA. W.MoeneK. O.SørensenE. Ø.TungoddenB. (2013). Needs versus entitlements—An international fairness experiment. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11, 574–598.
15.
CarloG.OkunM. A.KnightG. P.de GuzmanM. R. T. (2005). The interplay of traits and motives on volunteering: Agreeableness, extraversion and prosocial value motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1293–1305. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.08.012
16.
CherryT. L.FrykblomP.ShogrenJ. F. (2002). Hardnose the dictator. American Economic Review, 92, 1218–1221.
17.
DanaJ.WeberR. A.KuangJ. X. (2007). Exploiting moral wiggle room: Experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Economic Theory, 33, 67–80. doi:http://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-006-0153-z
18.
DeutschM. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.
DeYoungC. G.QuiltyL. C.PetersonJ. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.880
21.
EckelC. C.GrossmanP. J. (1996). Altruism in anonymous dictator games. Games and Economic Behavior, 16, 181–191. doi:http://doi.org/10.1006/game.1996.0081
22.
EisenbergN.MillerP. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 91–119.
23.
ElsterJ. (1989). The cement of society: A survey of social order. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
24.
EngelC. (2011). Dictator games: A meta study. Experimental Economics, 14, 583–610.
25.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. http://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
FehrE.FischbacherU. (2004b). Third-party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 63–87.
28.
FehrE.FischbacherU.GächterS. (2002). Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms. Human Nature, 13, 1–25.
29.
FehrE.SchmidtK. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868.
30.
FengC.LuoY.GuR.BrosterL. S.ShenX.TianT.…KruegerF. (2013). The flexible fairness: Equality, earned entitlement, and self-interest. PLoS One, 8, e73106.
31.
FergusonE.FlynnN. (2016). Moral relativism as a disconnect between behavioural and experienced warm glow. Journal of Economic Psychology, 56, 163–175.
32.
FergusonE.HeckmanJ. J.CorrP. (2011). Personality and economics: Overview and proposed framework. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 201–209. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.030
33.
FergusonE.LievensF. (In Press). Future directions in personality, occupational and medical selection: Myths, misunderstandings, measurement, and suggestions. Advances in Health Sciences Education.
34.
FergusonE.StarmerC. (2013). Incentives, expertise, and medical decisions: Testing the robustness of natural frequency framing. Health Psychology, 32, 967–977. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/a0033720
35.
ForsytheR.HorowitzJ. L.SavinN. E.SeftonM. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 6, 347–369. doi:http://doi.org/10.1006/game.1994.1021
36.
FrohlichN.OppenheimerJ.KurkiA. (2004). Modeling other-regarding preferences and an experimental test. Public Choice, 119, 91–117.
37.
GelmanA.SternH. (2006). The difference between “significant” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant. The American Statistician, 60, 328–331. doi:http://doi.org/10.1198/000313006X152649
38.
GilbertP. (2015). The evolution and social dynamics of compassion. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 239–254.
39.
GoetzJ. L.KeltnerD.Simon-ThomasE. (2010). Compassion: An evolutionary analysis and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 351–374.
40.
GrazianoW. G.EisenbergN. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In HoganR.JohnsonJ.BriggsS. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795–824). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41.
GrazianoW. G.HabashiM. M.SheeseB. E.TobinR. M. (2007). Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person × situation perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 583–599. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.583
HaisleyE. C.WeberR. A. (2010). Self-serving interpretations of ambiguity in other-regarding behavior. Games and Economic Behavior, 68, 614–625.
44.
HilbigB. E.ThielmannI.HeppJ.KleinS.ZettlerI. (2015). From personality to altruistic behavior (and back): Evidence from a double-blind dictator game. Journal of Research in Personality, 55, 46–50. doi:http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.12.004
45.
HirshJ. B.DeYoungC. G.XuX.PetersonJ. B. (2010). Compassionate liberals and polite conservatives: Associations of agreeableness with political ideology and moral values. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 655–664. doi:http://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210366854
46.
JaeggiA. V.BurkartJ. M.van SchaikC. P. (2010). On the psychology of cooperation in humans and other primates: Combining the natural history and experimental evidence of prosociality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 365, 2723–2735.
47.
KahnemanD.KnetschJ. L.ThalerR. H. (1986). Fairness and the assumptions of economics. Journal of Business, 59, S285–S300. doi:http://doi.org/10.1086/296367
48.
KimbroughE. O.VostroknutovA. (2015). Norms make preferences social. Journal of the European Economic Association. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/jeea.12152
KonowJ. (2003). Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 1188–1239. doi:http://doi.org/10.1257/002205103771800013
51.
KonowJ. (2010). Mixed feelings: Theories of and evidence on giving. Journal of Public Economics, 94, 279–297.
52.
LernerM. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
53.
LevittS. D.ListJ. A. (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world?Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21, 153–174.
54.
LittleT. D.RhemtullaM.GibsonK.SchoemannA. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods, 18, 285–300. doi:10.1037/a0033266
55.
MaL. K.TunneyR. J.FergusonE. (2014). Gratefully received, gratefully repaid: The role of perceived fairness in cooperative interactions. PLoS One, 9, e114976.
56.
MarshH. W.LüdtkeO.NagengastB.MorinA. J. S.Von DavierM. (2013). Why item parcels are (almost) never appropriate: Two wrongs do not make a right—Camouflaging misspecification with item parcels in CFA models. Psychological Methods, 18, 257–284. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/a0032773
57.
MittoneL.PlonerM. (2012). Asset legitimacy and distributive justice in the dictator game: An experimental analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 135–142. doi:http://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.708
58.
OsborneD.WoottonL. W.SibleyC. G. (2013). Are liberals agreeable or not? Politeness and compassion differentially predict political conservatism via distinct ideologies. Social Psychology, 44, 354–360. doi:http://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000132
59.
RossL. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173–220). New York, NY: Academic Press.
60.
RuffleB. J. (1998). More is better, but fair is fair: Tipping in dictator and ultimatum games. Games and Economic Behavior, 23, 247–265. doi:http://doi.org/10.1006/game.1997.0630
61.
ScottJ. T.MatlandR. E.MichelbachP. A.BornsteinB. H. (2001). Just deserts: An experimental study of distributive justice norms. American Journal of Political Science, 45, 749. doi:http://doi.org/10.2307
62.
SingerT.SteinbeisN. (2009). Differential roles of fairness- and compassion-based motivations for cooperation, defection, and punishment. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1167, 41–50. doi:http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.04733.x
63.
SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2016). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/pspp0000096
64.
VossT. (2001). Game theoretical perspectives on the emergence of social norms. In HechterM.OppK. D. (Eds.), Social norms (pp. 105–138). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
65.
WestfallJ.YarkoniT. (2016). Statistically controlling for confounding constructs is harder than you think. PLoS One, 11, e0152719.
66.
WilhelmM. O.BekkersR. (2010). Helping behavior, dispositional empathic concern, and the principle of care. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 11–32. doi:http://doi.org/10.1177/0190272510361435
ZhaoK.FergusonE.SmillieL. D. (2016). Individual differences in good manners rather than compassion predict fair allocations of wealth in the dictator game. Journal of Personality. doi:10.1111/jopy.12237
69.
ZhaoK.SmillieL. D. (2015). The role of interpersonal traits in social decision making: Exploring sources of behavioral heterogeneity in economic games. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 277–302. doi:http://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314553709
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.
