When Rationality and Fairness Conflict: The Role of Cognitive-Control in the Ultimatum Game
22 Pages Posted: 21 Jun 2011 Last revised: 27 Sep 2011
Date Written: June 21, 2011
Abstract
The ultimatum game models social exchange in situations in which the rational motive to maximize gains conflicts with fairness considerations. Using two independent behavioral measurements, the authors tested two contradicting predictions: that the preference for fairness is a deliberative cognitive-controlled act or that it is an automatic act. In Experiment 1, participants whose cognitive-control resources were depleted rejected more unfair offers compared to control participants. In Experiment 2, it took longer to accept than to reject unfair offers. These results suggest that fairness considerations operate more automatically than rational considerations, and that the latter depend on the availability of limited cognitive control resources.
Keywords: decision-making, social preferences, fairness, economic self-interest, ultimatum-game, cognitive-control, ego-depletion, reaction time
JEL Classification: A12, A13, C70, C71, C72, C78
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Instinctive and Cognitive Reasoning: A Study of Response Times
-
Small- and Large-Stakes Risk Aversion: Implications of Concavity Calibration for Decision Theory
By James C. Cox and Vjollca Sadiraj
-
Measuring Intertemporal Preferences Using Response Times
By Christopher F. Chabris, David Laibson, ...
-
Fast or Fair? A Study of Response Times
By Marco Piovesan and Erik Wengström
-
Strategic Choice of Preferences: The Persona Model
By David Wolpert, Julian C. Jamison, ...
-
Response Time Under Monetary Incentives: The Ultimatum Game
By Pablo Brañas-garza, Ana Leon-mejia, ...
-
Schelling Formalized: Strategic Choices of Non-Rational Personas