The recoding of social orientations with ranking and pair comparison procedures

Abstract

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL FRAME OF SOCIAL ORIENTATIONSA number of social-psychological investigations into decisions in situations of social interdependence have been carried out with simple experimental games. Kelley and Thibaut (1978) have shown that persons in such situations possibly do not base their decisions on the objective features of the situation. It is far more the subjective cognitive representation of the situation that is used for the decisions. Kelley and Thibaut (1978) stress the importance of the subjective transformation of the given payoff matrix of the game. Not only own payoffs are evaluated, but also the payoffs for the other partners can be positively or negatively considered. Such subjective evaluations of outcomes have been called social orientations or social motives. *The research reported was supported by the Deutsche Forschunjsgemeinschaft (Schu 543/ I -I).

Preferences for changing power positions and power distances: a social value orientations approach

“…Social value orientations are preferences people have for outcomes for themselves (S) and/or another person (O). Six orientations often distinguished are: individualism (max S; maximizing own outcomes regardless of another's outcomes), altruism (max O; maximizing another's outcomes regardless of one's own outcomes), cooperation (max S þ O; maximizing the sum of outcomes for oneself and another), competition (max S À O; maximizing the difference in outcomes-to own's own advantage-for oneself and another), equality orientation (min |S À O|; minimizing the difference in outcomes for oneself and another) and maximin orientation (max S, O; maximizing the outcomes for the person who gets less) (Grzelak, Poppe, Cwartosz, & Nowak, 1988;Iedema & Poppe, 1994;Kuhlman & Marshello, 1975;McClintock, Messick, Kuhlman, & Campos, 1973;Schulz & May, 1989). In the social value orientations model, some orientations can be inverted.…”

“…The three dimensions are max H, max M, and min |H À M| (see Schulz & May, 1989;Wieczorkowska, 1982). 3 In Table 1, this model has been applied to a two-person situation.…”

Beliefs about the social orientations of others: A parametric test of the triangle, false consensus, and cone hypotheses

“…A person who has an equality orientation minimizes the difference between her own and other's outcomes. A person who has a maximin orientation maximizes outcomes of the person who receives the lowest outcomes (Griesinger & Livingston, 1977;McClintock, 1972;Schulz & May, 1989). Next to identifying and distinguishing different types of social orientations, the relationship between one's social orientation and one's beliefs about others' social orientations is another important research area in the social orientation literature.…”

Effects of social value orientation on expecting and learning others' orientations

“…In previous research (Messick and McClintock, 1968;McClintock, Messick, Kuhlman and Campos, 1973;Grzelak, Iwinski and Radzicki, 1977;Liebrand, Jansen, Rijkin and Suhre, 1986;Schulz and May, 1989) the most important social orientations observed were; indivzdualism (maximzing one's own outcomes without considering the outcomes of another person), cooperation (maximizing outcomes for self and another person), competition (maximizing the difference between one's own and another person's outcomes to one's own advantage), altruism (maximizing outcomes for another person), equality (minimizing the difference between own and another's outcomes) and maximzn (maximizing outcomes for the person who receives the lowest outcomes). In recent research (Van Lange and Liebrand, 1991) social orientations are sometimes distinguished into pro-self onentations (competition and individualism) and pro-social orientations (altruism, equality, cooperation, and maximin), a distinction which is based on concern for others.…”