Standard vs random dictator games: On the effects of role uncertainty and framing on generosity

Mesa-Vázquez, Ernesto; Rodríguez-Lara, Ismael; Urbano, Amparo

doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2021.109981

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is some evidence that being in a powerful position decreases the tendency to see things from another’s perspective [ 53 – 55 ], and if this is true, reducing the feeling of power could potentially increase perspective-taking, and via that process, dictator game giving. In effect, Mesa-Vazquez et al [ 56 ] observed a decrease in dictator game giving when the probability of being the dictator increased.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of role awareness, empathy induction and trait empathy on dictator game giving

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We ask how state empathy, trait empathy, and role awareness influence dictator game giving in a monetarily incentivized experiment. We manipulated two factors: role awareness (role certainty vs. role uncertainty) and state empathy induction (no empathy induction vs. empathy induction). Under role uncertainty, participants did not know their role as a dictator or a recipient when making their choices. State empathy was induced by asking the dictators to consider what the recipient would feel when learning about the decision. Each participant was randomly assigned into one of the four conditions, and in each condition, participants were randomly assigned into dictator and receiver roles. The role assignment took place before or after decisions were made, depending on the condition. We also studied the direct influence of trait empathy on dictator game giving as well as its interaction with the experimental manipulations. Trait empathy was measured by the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Questionnaire of Cognitive and Affective Empathy (QCAE) before the experiment. Of our experimental manipulations, role awareness had an effect on dictator game giving; participants donated more under role uncertainty than under role certainty. Instead, we did not observe an effect of state empathy induction. Of trait empathy subscales, only affective empathy was positively associated with dictator game giving. Finally, role awareness did not influence all participants similarly but had a larger impact on those with low scores on trait empathic concern or trait affective empathy. Our results indicate that specific measures to induce altruistic sharing can be effective but their effect may vary depending on certain personal characteristics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of role awareness, empathy induction and trait empathy on dictator game giving

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For further similar research see [ 6 , 7 ]. Additionally, Mesa-Vazquez, Rodriguez-Lara, & Urbano [ 8 ] find that when there is uncertainty about whether a dictator’s choices are implemented, their actions are more generous.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sure-thing vs. probabilistic charitable giving: Experimental evidence on the role of individual differences in risky and ambiguous charitable decision-making

Schönegger

Costa‐Gomes

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charities differ, among other things, alongside the likelihood that their interventions succeed and produce the desired outcomes and alongside the extent that such likelihood can even be articulated numerically. In this paper, we investigate what best explains charitable giving behaviour regarding charities that have interventions that will succeed with a quantifiable and high probability (sure-thing charities) and charities that have interventions that only have a small and hard to quantify probability of bringing about the desired end (probabilistic charities). We study individual differences in risk/ambiguity attitudes, empathy, numeracy, optimism, and donor type (warm glow vs. pure altruistic donor type) as potential predictors of this choice. We conduct a money incentivised, pre-registered experiment on Prolific on a representative UK sample (n = 1,506) to investigate participant choices (i) between these two types of charities and (ii) about one randomly selected charity. Overall, we find little to no evidence that individual differences predict choices regarding decisions about sure-thing and probabilistic charities, with the exception that a purely altruistic donor type predicts donations to probabilistic charities when participants were presented with a randomly selected charity in (ii). Conducting exploratory equivalence tests, we find that the data provide robust evidence in favour of the absence of an effect (or a negligibly small effect) where we fail to reject the null. This is corroborated by exploratory Bayesian analyses. We take this paper to be contributing to the literature on charitable giving via this comprehensive null-result in pursuit of contributing to a cumulative science.

show abstract

“…Note that the exclusion of the purely selfish subjects is a conservative cutoff, as it is well-known that the implied uncertainty of the strategy method dissipates selfish behavior in dictator games (e.g Sefton, 1992;Iriberri and Rey-Biel, 2011;Mesa-Vázquez et al, 2021)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivated beliefs, social preferences, and limited liability in financial decision-Making

Ahrens

Bosch-Rosa

2023

Journal of Banking & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard vs random dictator games: On the effects of role uncertainty and framing on generosity

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

The influence of role awareness, empathy induction and trait empathy on dictator game giving

The influence of role awareness, empathy induction and trait empathy on dictator game giving

Sure-thing vs. probabilistic charitable giving: Experimental evidence on the role of individual differences in risky and ambiguous charitable decision-making

Motivated beliefs, social preferences, and limited liability in financial decision-Making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About