More than Thirty Years of Ultimatum Bargaining Experiments: Motives, Variations, and a Survey of the Recent Literature

Güth, Werner; Kocher, Martin G.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2319871

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 105 publications

(112 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, it provides an objective behavioral measure (i.e., offer accepted/rejected or total gain), it incorporates an inherent interpersonal context in the anger experience, and its standardized methodology enables it to be easily adaptable to various neuroimaging modalities. Indeed, for more than three decades, the UG has been trailblazing in the fields of economics, psychology, anthropology, neuroscience, and many more, establishing itself as a canonical social decision-making paradigm (Güth & Kocher, 2013; van Damme et al, 2014). Nonetheless, the anger literature has largely overlooked the potential usage of the UG as an anger-induction paradigm (e.g., Berkowitz & Harmon-Jones, 2004; Lench, Flores, & Bench, 2011; Lobbestael, Arntz, & Wiers, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The anger-infused Ultimatum Game: A reliable and valid paradigm to induce and assess anger.

Gilam¹,

Abend²,

Shani³

et al. 2019

Emotion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Ultimatum Game (UG) is a canonical social decision-making task whereby a proposer divides a sum of money between himself and a responder who accepts or rejects the offer. Studies consistently demonstrate that unfair offers induce anger, and that rejecting such offers relates to aggression. Nevertheless, the UG is limited in interpersonal provocations common to real-life experiences of anger. Moreover, the psychometric properties of the UG as an anger-induction paradigm have yet to be evaluated. Here, to induce a more intense and genuine anger experience, we implemented a modified UG whereby short written provocations congruent with unfairness levels accompanied each offer. We aimed to test whether this anger-infused UG led to more anger and aggressive responses relative to the standard UG and to establish the reliability and validity of both versions. Participants performed either the anger-infused UG or a standard version, repeated twice, a week apart. They also performed the Taylor Aggression Paradigm, a reactive aggression paradigm, and completed emotion ratings and a trait anger inventory. Results indicate similar decreases in acceptance rates with increase in offer unfairness, and increases in reported anger, across both UG versions. Both versions demonstrated strong test-retest reliability. However, the anger-infused UG led to significantly stronger relations with reactive aggression and trait anger compared to the standard UG, providing evidence for better validity. The development of the anger-infused UG as a reliable and valid paradigm is pivotal for the induction and assessment of interpersonal anger and its aggressive expression in basic and clinical research settings. (PsycINFO Database Record

show abstract