PDF
FLIP
HTML
XML (Español (España))
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
Resources are distributed unequally depending on the social status (SS) of people. Researchers have often used experiments to explain the role of SS in economic decisions. However, the diverse ways of inducing SS has produced contradictory results. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of SS on the distribution of monetary resources in students aged 18 to 25 years from Córdoba (Argentina). Three experiments using mixed factorial designs were conducted. Different ways of inducing SS and the effect on decisions in different games were examined. In Experiment 1, the effect of two SS induction techniques on the decisions of the Ultimatum Game (UG) and Dictator Game (DG) was compared. In Experiment 2, the effect of SS on the same games, including Social Value Orientation (SVO) and Subjective Social Status (SSS) as covariates was analyzed. In Experiment 3, the role of SS, SVO and SSS in the DG and the Dictator Game Taking (DGT) was examined. In the three experiments, it was not found that SS had any effect on the decisions of the games. However, more rejection and negative valence was observed (Exp. 1: p < .001, n2 p =.72; Exp. 2: p < .001, n2 p = .65) for unfair offers than for fair ones (Exp. 2: p < .001). Also, pro-social individuals made fairer offers in the DG (Exp. 2: p < .05) and participants offered more money in the DGT than in the DG (Exp. 3: p = .01). Those findings showed that the effect of SS on behavioral responses is not robust, which highlights the need to obtain new experimental evidence to investigate its role in those decisions.
Keywords:
References
Adler, N.E., Epel, E., Castellazzo, G. and Ickovics, J. (2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physical health: Preliminary data in healthy white women. Health Psychology, 19, 586?592. DOI:10.1037//0278-6133.19.6.586
Albrecht, K., von Essen, E., Fliessbach, K., & Falk, A. (2013). The influence of status on satisfaction with relative rewards. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(804), 1-9. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00804
American Psychological Association (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists. Washington, DC: Author.
Ball, S. B. & Eckel, C. (1996). Buying status: Experimental evidence on status in negotiation. Psychology and Marketing, 13(4), 381- 405. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(199607)13:4<379: AID-MAR4>3.0.CO;2-7
Ball, S. B., Eckel, C., Grossman, P. J., & Zame, W. (2001). Status in markets. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 161-188. DOI: 10.1162/003355301556374
Blue, P. R., Hu, J., Wang, X., van Dijk, E., & Zhou, X. (2016). When do low status individuals accept less? The interaction between self and other-status during resource distribution. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(1667), 1-7. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01667
Boksem, M. A. S., Kostermans, E., Milivojevice, B., & De Cremer, D. (2012). Social status determines how we monitor and evaluate our performance. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7, 304-313. DOI:10.1093/scan/nsr010
Bolton, G. E., Katok, E., & Zwick, R. (1998). Dictator game giving: rules of fairness versus acts of kindness. International Journal of Game Theory, 27, 269-299. doi:10.1007/s001820050072
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25, 49-59. DOI:10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9
Bshary, R., Gingins, S., and Vail, A.L. (2014). Social cognition in fishes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 465-471. DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2014.04.005
Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. New York: Princeton University Press.
de la Torre, A., Messina, J., & Silva, J. (2017). The inequality story in Latin America and the Caribbean: Searching for an explanation. In: Bértola L., Williamson J. (eds) Has Latin American inequality changed direction? (pp. 317-338). Springer, Cham. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-44621-9_13
Chiao, J. Y., Harada, T., Oby, R., Li, Z., Parrish, T., & Bridge, D. J. (2009). Neural representations of social status hierarchy in human inferior parietal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 47, 354?363. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.09.023
Civai, C., Corradi-Dell?Acqua, C., Gamer, M., & Rumiati, R. I. (2010). Are irrational reactions to unfairness truly emotionally-driven? Dissociated behavioural and emotional responses in the Ultimatum Game task. Cognition, 114, 89-95. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.09.001
De la Torre, A., Messina, J., & Silva, J. (2017). The inequality story in Latin America and the Caribbean: Searching for an explanation. In: Bértola L., Williamson J. (eds.) Has Latin American inequality changed direction? (pp. 317-338). Springer, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44621-9_13
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817- 868. doi: 10.1162/003355399556151
Grygolec, J., Coricelli, G., & Rustichini, A. (2009). Neuroeconomics of 3-person ultimatum game with voting: The case of responders (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Faculty of Graduate School of University of Minnesota, USA.
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarz, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 367-388. doi: 10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7
Haesevoets, T., Folmer, C. R., & Van Hiel, A. (2015). Cooperation in mixed?motive games: The role of individual differences in selfish and social orientation. European Journal of Personality, 29(4), 445-458. DOI:10.1002/per.1992
Haveman, R., & Smeeding, T. M. (2006). The role of higher education in social mobility. Future of Children, 16(2), 125-50. DOI:10.1353/foc.2006.0015
Henrich, J., & Gil-White, F. J. (2001). The evolution of prestige: freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 165-196. doi:10.1016/S10905138(00)00 071-4
Hu, J., Blue, P. R., Yu, H., Gong, X., Xiang, Y., Jiang, C., & Zhou, X. (2016). Social status modulates the neural response to unfairness. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1(1), 1-10. DOI:10.1093/scan/nsv086
Hu, J., Cao, Y., Blue, P. R., & Zhou, X. (2014). Low social status decreases the neural salience of unfairness. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(402), 1-12. DOI:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00402
Karafin, M. S., Tranel, D., & Adolphs, R. (2004). Dominance attributions following damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 1796-1804. DOI:10.1162/0898929042947856
Koski, J. E., Xie, H., & Olson, I. R. (2015) Understanding social hierarchies: The neural and psychological foundations of status perception, Social Neuroscience, 10(5), 527-550. doi:10.1080/17470919.2015.1013223
Kraus, M. W., Park, J. W., & Tan, J. J. X. (2017). Signs of social class: The experience of economic inequality in everyday life. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(3), 422-435. doi:10.1177/1745691616673192
Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Soci
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188. DOI:10.1006/obhd.1998.2804
Levitt, S. D., & List, J. (2007). What do laboratory experiments measuring social preferences reveal about the real world? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(2), 153-174. DOI:10.1257/jep.21.2.153
List, J. A. (2007). On the interpretation of giving in dictator games. Journal of Political Economy, 115(3), 482-493. DOI:10.1086/519249
Mola, D. J., Godoy, J. C., & Reyna, C. (2017). Revisión de técnicas para operacionalizar el estatus social en estudios experimentales. Manuscript submitted to publication.
Morgan, J., & Kelly, N. J. (2017). Social patterns of inequality, partisan competition, and Latin American support for redistribution. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 193-209. DOI:10.1086/687412
Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A., & Handgraaf, M. J. J. (2011). Measuring social value orientation. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(8), 771-781. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1804189
Peirce, J. W. (2007). PsychoPy - Psychophysics software in Python. Journal Neuroscience Methods, 162(1-2), 8-13. DOI:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 771-784 DOI:10.1037/a0020092
Polezzi, A., Daumb, I., Rubaltelli, E., Lottoa, L., Civai, C. Sartori, G., & Rumiati, R. (2008). Mentalizing in economic decision-making. Behavioural Brain Research, 190, 218-223. DOI:10.1016/j.bbr.2008.03.003
Reyna, C., Belaus, A., Mola, D., Ortiz, M. V., & Acosta, C. (2017). Social Values Orientation Measure Scale: Evidences of validity and reliability among Argentine undergraduate students. Manuscript accepted to publication.
Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Social status and health in humans and other animals. Annual Review of Anthropology, 33, 393-418. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.144000
Starmans, C., Sheskin, M., & Bloom, P. (2017). Why people prefer unequal societies. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(0082), 1-7. doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0082.
Suvoy, R. (2003). The effects of give and take framing in a dictator game (Honors Theses). University of Oregon, USA.
Tricomi, E., Rangel, A., Camerer, C. F., & O?Doherty, J. P. (2010). Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences. Nature, 463(25), 1089-1092. doi:10.1038/nature08785
Van Lange, P. A. M., Joireman, J., Parks, C. D., & Van Dijk, E. (2013). The psychology of social dilemmas: A review.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 125-141. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.11.003
Watkins, K. (2013, March). Inequality as a barrier to human development. Paper presented at Kapuscinski Development Lectures, Stockholm School of Economics, Sweden.Available at: http://kapuscinskilectures.eu/lectures/inequality-as-barrier-to-human-development/
Wechsler, D. (2002). WAIS III. Escala de Inteligencia Wechsler para Adultos. Madrid: TEA.
Xiang, T., Lohrenz, T., & Montague, P. R. (2013). Computational substrates of norms and their violations during social exchange. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(3), 1099 -1108. DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1642-12.2013
Yamagishi, T., Mifune, N., Li, Y., Shinada, M., Hashimoto, H., Horita, Y., Miura, A., Inukai, K., Tanida, S., Kiyonari, T., Takagishi, H., & Simunovic, D. (2013). Is behavioral pro-sociality game-specific? Pro-social preference and expectations of pro-sociality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120(2), 260-271. DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.06.002
Zink, C. F., Tong, Y., Chen, Q., Bassett, D. S., Stein, J.L., & Meyer-Lindenberg, A. (2008). Know your place: Neural processing of social hierarchy in humans. Neuron, 58(2), 273-283. DOI:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.01.025
Reference by
