scholarly journals Doing good vs. avoiding bad in prosocial choice: A refined test and extension of the morality preference hypothesis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben M Tappin ◽  
Valerio Capraro
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Dictator Game ◽  
Psychological Theory ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Social Life

Prosociality is fundamental to human social life, and, accordingly, much research has attempted to explain human prosocial behavior. Capraro and Rand (Judgment and Decision Making, 13, 99-111, 2018) recently provided experimental evidence that prosociality in anonymous, one-shot interactions (such as Prisoner’s Dilemma and Dictator Game experiments) is not driven by outcome-based social preferences – as classically assumed – but by a generalized morality preference for “doing the right thing”. Here we argue that the key experiments reported in Capraro and Rand (2018) comprise prominent methodological confounds and open questions that bear on influential psychological theory. Specifically, their design confounds: (i) preferences for efficiency with self-interest; and (ii) preferences for action with preferences for morality. Furthermore, their design fails to dissociate the preference to do “good” from the preference to avoid doing “bad”. We thus designed and conducted a preregistered, refined and extended test of the morality preference hypothesis (N=801). Consistent with this hypothesis, our findings indicate that prosociality in the anonymous, one-shot Dictator Game is driven by preferences for doing the morally right thing. Inconsistent with influential psychological theory, however, our results suggest the preference to do “good” was as potent as the preference to avoid doing “bad” in this case.

Social Preferences as an Individual Difference in Offender Decision-making

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chae M. Jaynes ◽  
Thomas A. Loughran
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Ultimatum Game ◽  
Future Orientation ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Strategic Decision Making ◽  
Temporal Orientation ◽  
Self Interest

Objectives: We examined the relationship between social preference game behavior and offender status and tested whether this relationship was attributed to genuine prosocial preferences or confounded by individual differences in future orientation, sensation seeking, and risk-taking. Methods: Offender and nonoffender samples played the dictator and ultimatum games. Ordered and generalized ordered logistic regression models were used to test the hypothesis that when compared to nonoffenders, offenders would demonstrate increased self-interest, while also considering competing theoretical mechanisms. Results: Offenders appeared to be more self-interested as indicated by smaller offers in the dictator game. This relationship, however, was attributed to differences in future orientation between the two groups rather than differences in social preferences. Net of demographic controls and competing theoretical mechanisms, however, offenders made smaller offers in the ultimatum game. We argue this finding revealed differences in strategic decision-making between the two groups. Conclusions: Results suggested that offenders were not distinguishable from nonoffenders by individual differences in social preferences. While nonoffenders made larger offers in both games, this finding was attributed to differences in temporal orientation and risk-taking rather than differences in prosocial preferences. This supported the rational choice assumption of self-interest and highlighted differences in strategic decision-making between offenders and nonoffenders.

Executive Selection—What's Right … and What's Wrong

2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
George P. Hollenbeck
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Selection Decisions ◽  
Executive Selection ◽  
Decision Making Problem ◽  
The World ◽  
The Right ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Psychometric Validity

Although recent reviews of executive selection have catalogued much that we as industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists are doing right in our research and practice, we are confronted with the facts that executive selection decisions are often, if not usually, wrong and that I–O psychologists seldom have a place at the table when these decisions are made. This article suggests that in our thinking we have failed to differentiate executive selection from selection at lower levels and that we have applied the wrong models. Our hope for the future lies not in job analyses, developing new tests, meta-analyses, or seeking psychometric validity, but in viewing executive selection as a judgment and decision-making problem. With the right focus, applying our considerable methodological skills should enable us to contribute toward making better judgments. When we have a better mousetrap, organizations (if not the world) will beat a path to our door.

scholarly journals Neural mechanisms of social decision-making in the primate amygdala

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (52) ◽  
pp. 16012-16017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve W. C. Chang ◽  
Nicholas A. Fagan ◽  
Koji Toda ◽  
Amanda V. Utevsky ◽  
John M. Pearson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Behavior ◽  
Basolateral Amygdala ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Dictator Game ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Social Decisions ◽  
The Social ◽  
Context Specific ◽  
Social Decision Making

Social decisions require evaluation of costs and benefits to oneself and others. Long associated with emotion and vigilance, the amygdala has recently been implicated in both decision-making and social behavior. The amygdala signals reward and punishment, as well as facial expressions and the gaze of others. Amygdala damage impairs social interactions, and the social neuropeptide oxytocin (OT) influences human social decisions, in part, by altering amygdala function. Here we show in monkeys playing a modified dictator game, in which one individual can donate or withhold rewards from another, that basolateral amygdala (BLA) neurons signaled social preferences both across trials and across days. BLA neurons mirrored the value of rewards delivered to self and others when monkeys were free to choose but not when the computer made choices for them. We also found that focal infusion of OT unilaterally into BLA weakly but significantly increased both the frequency of prosocial decisions and attention to recipients for context-specific prosocial decisions, endorsing the hypothesis that OT regulates social behavior, in part, via amygdala neuromodulation. Our findings demonstrate both neurophysiological and neuroendocrinological connections between primate amygdala and social decisions.

scholarly journals SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE HANDSHAKE AS A CRUCIAL INDICATOR OF THE EMPATHIC AND PEACEBUILDING CULTURE

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 135-142
Author(s):  
Joanna Puppel
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Fundamental Importance ◽  
Upper Limbs ◽  
Erect Posture ◽  
Human Culture ◽  
Right Hand ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Social Life

Handshake is a very primeval human gesture which follows from the erect posture and the freeing of the upper limbs. Its evolutionary benefits for mankind are briefly discussed. It is emphasized that the free hands, the right hand in particular, have been of fundamental importance to human culture thus underlying interpersonal linkages and communication. Handshake is loaded semantically positively and in this capacity it serves in a number of important integrative functions in human social life, in particular, in peacebuilding.

scholarly journals Rethinking Integration of Epistemic Strategies in Social Understanding: Examining the Central Role of Mindreading in Pluralist Accounts

Erkenntnis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Wolf ◽  
Sabrina Coninx ◽  
Albert Newen
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Second Step ◽  
Social Understanding ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Epistemic Strategies ◽  
Pluralist Approach ◽  
Human Social Life

AbstractIn recent years, theories of social understanding have moved away from arguing that just one epistemic strategy, such as theory-based inference or simulation constitutes our ability of social understanding. Empirical observations speak against any monistic view and have given rise to pluralistic accounts arguing that humans rely on a large variety of epistemic strategies in social understanding. We agree with this promising pluralist approach, but highlight two open questions: what is the residual role of mindreading, i.e. the indirect attribution of mental states to others within this framework, and how do different strategies of social understanding relate to each other? In a first step, we aim to clarify the arguments that might be considered in evaluating the role that epistemic strategies play in a pluralistic framework. On this basis, we argue that mindreading constitutes a core epiststrategy in human social life that opens new central spheres of social understanding. In a second step, we provide an account of the relation between different epistemic strategies which integrates and demarks the important role of mindreading for social understanding.

MAPPING DECISIONS TO IMPROVE CRISIS RESPONSE

2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 349-351
Author(s):  
William Healy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Crisis Response ◽  
Judgment And Decision Making ◽  
Contingency Planning ◽  
Dynamic Event ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Contingency Plans ◽  
The Right

ABSTRACT Judgment and decision making are key components of every response and most current contingency plans fail to acknowledge this fully. Decision Mapping is a concept that provides planners with the tools to identify and analyze key decisions that may present themselves during the event timeline, and it prepares leaders to make quick and informed decisions. It provides an organized method to identify stakeholders, information needs, authorities, and consideration thresholds in a prioritized structure to give leaders the right perspective for balancing competing needs. It is a new way to approach contingency planning that goes beyond the listing of resources and views a response as a dynamic event with many uncertain components.

Cooperation and Learning in Unfamiliar Situations

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 436-440
Author(s):  
William H. B. McAuliffe ◽  
Maxwell N. Burton-Chellew ◽  
Michael E. McCullough
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
Social Approval ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Helping Strangers ◽  
Future Consequences ◽  
Widespread View ◽  
Human Social Life

Human social life is rife with uncertainty. In any given encounter, one can wonder whether cooperation will generate future benefits. Many people appear to resolve this dilemma by initially cooperating, perhaps because (a) encounters in everyday life often have future consequences, and (b) the costs of alienating oneself from long-term social partners often outweighed the short-term benefits of acting selfishly over our evolutionary history. However, because cooperating with other people does not always advance self-interest, people might also learn to withhold cooperation in certain situations. Here, we review evidence for two ideas: that people (a) initially cooperate or not depending on the incentives that are typically available in their daily lives and (b) also learn through experience to adjust their cooperation on the basis of the incentives of unfamiliar situations. We compare these claims with the widespread view that anonymously helping strangers in laboratory settings is motivated by altruistic desires. We conclude that the evidence is more consistent with the idea that people stop cooperating in unfamiliar situations because they learn that it does not help them, either financially or through social approval.

scholarly journals Learning Whether to Cooperate in Novel Social Interactions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H.B. McAuliffe ◽  
Michael E. McCullough ◽  
Maxwell Burton-Chellew
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Long Term Consequences ◽  
Lines Of Evidence ◽  
Human Social Life

Human social life is rife with uncertainty. In any given social interaction, one can wonder: Is cooperating with this person in my long-term best interest? Many people resolve to play it safe by cooperating rather than behaving selfishly, likely because (a) most social interactions in everyday life have long-term consequences and (b) the costs of alienating oneself from long-term social partners often outweighs the short-term benefits of cheating them. However, since trusting and sharing with others does not always advance self-interest, people might also learn through experience whether cooperation benefits them in any particular situation. Here, we review several lines of evidence suggesting that people initially decide when to share and trust based on the incentives that are present in their daily lives, but that they can also learn through experience to adjust their cooperation decisions to match the incentives of novel situations.

scholarly journals CHILD PARTICIPATION IN FAMILY DECISION-MAKING: THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE RUSSIAN PARENTS’ FORUM

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 157-170
Author(s):  
ALEXANDRA FILIPOVA
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Life Experience ◽  
Russian Society ◽  
Human Becoming ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Family Issues ◽  
Children’S Participation ◽  
Children's Participation ◽  
The Right

The topic of children's participation in various issues was updated in the second half of the last century. It was largely due to the adoption of an important international document such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Children are as important participants in social life as adults so they have the right to express their opinions on various issues related to their activities, as well as to take into account these opinions by adults in decision-making in the family, in school, in the community, etc. Russian society is dominated by the traditional discourse of the perception of children as human becoming, socially and mentally immature, not-yet-an-adult. To study the parental discourse of children's participation in family issues, empirical material of the network discussion organized at the parental forum called Vladmama (Vladivostok, Russia) is used. In order to organize the discussion, an information injection was carried out. It was the description of the imagined problematic situation of child-parental relations on the issue of child’s participation in family affairs. The 81 messages received from 25 users were analyzed according to James Gee approach.  Seven Gee’s “building tasks” (Activities; Identities; Relationships; Politics; Connections; Sign Systems and Knowledge) are researched on the materials of mother’s forum. The process of creating value is always connected with the exercise of power. In our case, mothers using their power as parents redefine the meanings of children's participation. The main resource that opens the way for adults to power is money. Earning money is interpreted by the participants of the forum as a way for a child to involve in the adult’s world, an opportunity to legalize the child’s right to express his/her own opinion and defend this opinion. Other sources of parent’s power are their own life experience, knowledge and social skills.

scholarly journals Distributive Justice and the Fundamental Human Rights (Focusing on Rights to Healthy Environment)

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Hassan Khosravi ◽  
Mojtaba Babaee
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Distributive Justice ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Equal Distribution ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
Fair Competition ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Kind ◽  
Human Social Life

<p>Justice is the ideal of human social life which can bestow the society order and stability and open up the way of sublimity. Resorting to the justice mechanisms, a peaceful collective community together with balance and equilibrium of different interests and conflicting wills become possible. Here the issue is the establishment of role of distributive justice in balance of general affairs of society along with acceptance of the notion of equal distribution of facilities, resources, rights and wealth among all people without any bias and prejudice and just because of intrinsic generosity of human kind in the first place, and establishment of the system of redistribution of resources for removing any practical injustice in society in the second place. Applying such theory has a direct relation with the preserving of the fundamental human rights through which the rights are distributed according to the being human and capabilities and virtues within a fair competition and in this way the threats to the fundamental human rights are decreased. The right of keeping a healthy environment can also be guaranteed under this theory.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document