The fire burns within: Individual motivations for self-sacrifice

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rima-Maria Rahal
Keyword(s):  
Value Orientation ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Interindividual Differences ◽  
Potential Contributor ◽  
Intergroup Conflicts ◽  
Specific Determinant

AbstractExtreme self-sacrifice in intergroup conflict may be driven not only by situational factors generating “fusion,” but also by interindividual differences. Social value orientation is discussed as a potential contributor to self-harming behavior outside of intergroup conflicts and to the general propensity to participate in intergroup conflict. Social value orientation may therefore also be a person-specific determinant of extreme self-sacrifice in intergroup conflict.

Social value orientation moderates ingroup love but not outgroup hate in competitive intergroup conflict

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 701-713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten K.W. de Dreu
Keyword(s):  
Cooperative Behavior ◽  
Prisoner’S Dilemma ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Value Orientations ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Path Analyses ◽  
Social Value Orientations ◽  
Prosocial Orientation

In intergroup conflict, individual cooperation may be directed at strengthening the ingroup, thus undermining the effectiveness and sustainability of the competing outgroup. Reversely, cooperation directed towards the competing outgroup indirectly undermines the viability of the ingroup and is often seen by ingroup members as disloyal, non-cooperative behavior. Using the Intergroup Prisoner’s Dilemma—Maximizing Differences Game to model intergroup conflict, the experiment reported here shows that compared to individuals with a chronic pro-self orientation, those with a chronic prosocial orientation display stronger ingroup trust and ingroup love—they self-sacrifice to benefit their ingroup—but not more or less outgroup distrust and outgroup hate. Furthermore, in this situation pro-social individuals were driven more by ingroup fairness considerations when contributing to their ingroup. Path analyses suggest that effects of social value orientation on ingroup love are mediated by ingroup trust and not by fairness considerations. Implications for research on social value orientations, and intergroup conflict and competition are discussed.

scholarly journals Parochial trust and cooperation across 17 societies

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (48) ◽  
pp. 12702-12707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Romano ◽  
Daniel Balliet ◽  
Toshio Yamagishi ◽  
James H. Liu
Keyword(s):  
Group Membership ◽  
Decisive Role ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Test Theory ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
The Political ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Ingroup Outgroup

International challenges such as climate change, poverty, and intergroup conflict require countries to cooperate to solve these complex problems. However, the political tide in many countries has shifted inward, with skepticism and reluctance to cooperate with other countries. Thus, cross-societal investigations are needed to test theory about trust and cooperation within and between groups. We conducted an experimental study in 17 countries designed to test several theories that explain why, who, and where people trust and cooperate more with ingroup members, compared with outgroup members. The experiment involved several interactions in the trust game, either as a trustor or trustee. We manipulated partner group membership in the trust game (ingroup, outgroup, or unknown) and if their reputation was at stake during the interaction. In addition to the standard finding that participants trust and cooperate more with ingroup than outgroup members, we obtained findings that reputational concerns play a decisive role for promoting trust and cooperation universally across societies. Furthermore, men discriminated more in favor of their ingroup than women. Individual differences in cooperative preferences, as measured by social value orientation, predicted cooperation with both ingroup and outgroup members. Finally, we did not find support for three theories about the cross-societal conditions that influence the degree of ingroup favoritism observed across societies (e.g., material security, religiosity, and pathogen stress). We discuss the implications for promoting cooperation within and between countries.

Theories and Measurement Methods of Social Value Orientation Related to Decision Making

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen ZHANG ◽  
Fan ZHANG ◽  
Liang HUANG ◽  
Bo YUAN ◽  
Yiwen WANG
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Measurement Methods ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation

scholarly journals Social Value Orientation Modulates Fairness Processing During Social Decision-Making: Evidence From Behavior and Brain Potentials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinmu Hu ◽  
Xiaoqin Mai
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Ultimatum Game ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Emotional Reactions ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Social Decision ◽  
Frontal Negativity ◽  
Social Decision Making

Abstract Social value orientation (SVO) characterizes stable individual differences by an inherent sense of fairness in outcome allocations. Using the event-related potential (ERP), this study investigated differences in fairness decision-making behavior and neural bases between individuals with prosocial and proself orientations using the Ultimatum Game (UG). Behavioral results indicated that prosocials were more prone to rejecting unfair offers with stronger negative emotional reactions compared with proselfs. ERP results revealed that prosocials showed a larger P2 when receiving fair offers than unfair ones in a very early processing stage, whereas such effect was absent in proselfs. In later processing stages, although both groups were sensitive to fairness as reflected by an enhanced medial frontal negativity (MFN) for unfair offers and a larger P3 for fair offers, prosocials exhibited a stronger fairness effect on these ERP components relative to proselfs. Furthermore, the fairness effect on the MFN mediated the SVO effect on rejecting unfair offers. Findings regarding emotional experiences, behavioral patterns, and ERPs provide compelling evidence that SVO modulates fairness processing in social decision-making, whereas differences in neural responses to unfair vs. fair offers as evidenced by the MFN appear to play important roles in the SVO effect on behavioral responses to unfairness.

Individuele verschillen in graaigedrag

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maaike Jongenelen ◽  
Roos Vonk
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
High Power ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Value Orientation ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Equal Share ◽  
Power Scale ◽  
Role Playing Game

Individual differences in money-grabbing: The role of entitlement, social value orientation, and misuse of power Individual differences in money-grabbing: The role of entitlement, social value orientation, and misuse of power M. Jongenelen & R. Vonk, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 369-381 This research investigates the role of individual differences in money-grabbing. Feelings of entitlement, high scores on the Misuse of Power scale and a pro-self focus were expected to lead to grabbing behaviour in high-power individuals. While playing a manager in a role-playing game, participants had the opportunity to grab more valuable points then their equal share. Results showed that pro-self participants grabbed more than pro-socials. Among the pro-self participants, feelings of entitlement led to higher Misuse of Power scores which, in turn, led to more grabbing. Entitlement en Misuse of Power had no effect on grabbing in pro-socials. It is concluded that power does not corrupt absolutely: Individual differences predict how a powerful person will behave. Implications for business settings are dealt with in the discussion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document