By neglecting the lifelong importance of having a good reputation, humans can profit in the short run from immoral behavior. Thus, reputation-protection is an intertemporal choice. In three preregistered studies (N = 1,492 Americans), we tested the hypothesis that future-orientation would increase people’s willingness to protect their reputation from harm. In hypothetical scenarios, people had to choose whether they would pay an immediate cost to prevent a devastating rumor from spreading. Study 1 found a positive correlation between future-orientation and reputation-protection. Study 2 manipulated time perspective experimentally and found that future focus (vs. present focus) had a positive and causal effect on reputation-protection. Study 3 was a high-powered replication, showing that the effect of future focus on reputation-protective choice was robust and mediated by reputational concern. In line with common advice around the world of protecting one’s reputation from harm, one way people may achieve that goal is to think about the future before acting.
AlvardM. (2012). Human social ecology. In MitaniJ. (Ed.), The evolution of primate societies (pp. 141–162). University of Chicago Press.
2.
AndreoniJ. (1988). Why free ride? Strategies and learning in public goods experiments. Journal of Public Economics, 37, 291–304.
3.
AxelrodR. (1984). The evolution of cooperation (Vol. 5145). Basic Books (AZ).
4.
BaumeisterR. F. (2005). The cultural animal: Human nature, meaning, and social life. Oxford University Press.
5.
BaumeisterR. F.MarangesH. M.SjåstadH. (2018). Consciousness of the future as a matrix of maybe: Pragmatic prospection and the simulation of alternative possibilities. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 223–238.
6.
BaumeisterR. F.MasicampoE. J.VohsK. D. (2011). Do conscious thoughts cause behavior?Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 331–361.
7.
BeersmaB.Van KleefG. A. (2011). How the grapevine keeps you in line: Gossip increases contributions to the group. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 642–649.
8.
Ben-NerA.KramerA.LevyO. (2008). Economic and hypothetical dictator game experiments: Incentive effects at the individual level. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 1775–1784.
9.
BuhrmesterM.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.
10.
BulleyA.HenryJ.SuddendorfT. (2016). Prospection and the present moment: The role of episodic foresight in intertemporal choices between immediate and delayed rewards. Review of General Psychology, 20, 29–47.
11.
BullockJ. G.GreenD. P.HaS. E. (2010). Yes, but what’s the mechanism? (don’t expect an easy answer). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 550–558
12.
CamererC.MobbsD. (2016). Differences in behavior and brain activity during hypothetical and real choices. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 46–56.
de RidderD. T.Lensvelt-MuldersG.FinkenauerC.StockF. M.BaumeisterR. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 76–99.
15.
DennettD. C. (2017). From bacteria to bach and back: The evolution of minds. W. W. Norton.
16.
FalkA.BeckerA.DohmenT. J.HuffmanD.SundeU. (2016). The preference survey module: A validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences (IZA discussion papers, No. 9674). IZA.
17.
FalkA.BeckerA.DohmenT.EnkeB.HuffmanD.SundeU. (2018). Global evidence on economic preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133, 1645–1692.
18.
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.
19.
GilbertP. (1997). The evolution of social attractiveness and its role in shame, humiliation, guilt and therapy. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 70, 113–147.
20.
HaidtJ.RozinP.McCauleyC.ImadaS. (1997). Body, psyche, and culture: The relationship between disgust and morality. Psychology and Developing Societies, 9, 107–131.
21.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
22.
HenrichN.HenrichJ. P. (2007). Why humans cooperate: A cultural and evolutionary explanation. Oxford University Press.
23.
HershfieldH. E.CohenT. R.ThompsonL. (2012). Short horizons and tempting situations: Lack of continuity to our future selves leads to unethical decision making and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117, 298–310.
24.
HillK. (2002). Cooperative food acquisition by Ache foragers. Human Nature, 13, 105–128.
25.
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.
26.
JordanJ. J.RandD. G. (2019). Signaling when nobody is watching: A reputation heuristics account of outrage and punishment in one-shot anonymous interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000186
27.
KahnemanD. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.
28.
KortenkampK. V.MooreC. F. (2006). Time, uncertainty, and individual differences in decisions to cooperate in resource dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 603–615.
29.
KvarvenA.StrømlandE.WollbrantC. E.AnderssonD.JohannessonM.TinghögG.VästfjällD.MyrsethK. R. (2019, April16). The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: A meta-analytic examination of effect-size and between-study heterogeneity. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/kvzg3
30.
McClureS. M.LaibsonD. I.LoewensteinG.CohenJ. D. (2004). Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306, 503–507.
31.
NowakM.HighfieldR. (2011). Supercooperators: Altruism, evolution, and why we need each other to succeed. Simon & Schuster.
32.
PagerD. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937–975.
33.
RandD. G. (2016). Cooperation, fast and slow: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of social heuristics and self-interested deliberation. Psychological Science, 27, 1192–1206.
34.
RonsonJ. (2016). So you’ve been publicly shamed. Riverhead Books.
35.
SimonsohnU. (2015). Small telescopes: Detectability and the evaluation of replication results. Psychological Science, 26, 559–569.
36.
SjåstadH. (2019). Short-sighted greed? Focusing on the future promotes reputation-based generosity. Judgment & Decision Making, 14, 199–213.
37.
StrathmanA.GleicherF.BoningerD. S.EdwardsC. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742–752.
38.
SuddendorfT. (2013). The gap: The science of what separates us from other animals. Basic Books.
39.
TanakaH.YagiA.KomiyaA.MifuneN.OhtsuboY. (2015). Shame-prone people are more likely to punish themselves: A test of the reputation-maintenance explanation for self-punishment. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1–7.
40.
TetlockP. E. (2003). Thinking the unthinkable: Sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 320–324.
41.
TomaselloM. (2016). A natural history of human morality. Harvard University Press.
42.
TriversR. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.
43.
UrminskyO.ZaubermanG. (2015). The psychology of intertemporal preferences. In KerenG.WuG. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision makingII (pp. 141–181). Wiley.
44.
Von HippelW. (2018). The social leap: The new evolutionary science of who we are, where we come from, and what makes us happy. Harper Collins.
45.
VonaschA. J.ReynoldsT.WinegardB. M.BaumeisterR. F. (2018). Death before dishonor: Incurring costs to protect moral reputation. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 604–613.
46.
WuJ.BallietD.Van LangeP. A. (2016). Reputation management: Why and how gossip enhances generosity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 193–201.
