scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts

TLDR
This article found that the typical utility function is steeply increasing and convex for disadvantageous inequality and weakly declining and a convex utility function for advantageous inequality in two-person ultimatum games and that disputants are concerned not only with the outcomes they receive, but also with their opponents' outcomes.
Abstract
Three studies examined preferences for outcomes to self and a codisputant. Studies I and 2 estimated social utility functions from judgments of satisfaction with alternative outcomes. Comparing functional forms, we found that a utility function, including terms for own payoff and for positive and negative discrepancies between the parties' payoffs (advantageous and disadvantageous inequality), provides a close fit to the data. The typical utility function is steeply increasing and convex for disadvantageous inequality and weakly declining and convex for advantageous inequality. We manipulated dispute type (personal, business) and disputant relationship (positive, neutral, or negative) and found that both strongly influence preferences for advantageous but not disadvantageous inequality. A third study contrasted implications of the social utility functions with predictions of individual utility theories. People care about the outcomes of others. We sacrifice our own interests to help loved ones or harm adversaries. Participants withdraw from profitable participation in a laboratory experiment if they perceive inequity in remuneration (Schmitt & Marweli, 1972). Players in two-person ultimatum games (in which one player proposes a distribution of a fixed amount of money that the other has the option of either accepting or rejecting) frequently reject a positive but inequitable offer even though the alternative is no gain at all (Guth, Schmittberger, & Schwarze, 1982). Negotiations between parties often collapse when one party becomes incensed with the other and attempts to "maximize his opponent's displeasure rather than his own satisfaction" (scigel & Fouraker, 1960, p. 100). In general, disputants are concerned not only with the outcomes they receive, but also with the outcomes of their opponents (Pruitt & Rubin, 1986).

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation

TL;DR: This paper showed that if some people care about equity, the puzzles can be resolved and that the economic environment determines whether the fair types or the selesh types dominate equilibrium behavior in cooperative games.
Journal ArticleDOI

A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation

TL;DR: This article showed that if a fraction of the people exhibit inequality aversion, stable cooperation is maintained although punishment is costly for those who punish, and they also showed that when they are given the opportunity to punish free riders, stable cooperations are maintained.
Journal ArticleDOI

ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition

TL;DR: The authors demonstrate that people are motivated by both their pecuniary payoff and their relative payoff standing, and demonstrate that a simple model, constructed on the premise that people were motivated by either their payoff or their relative standing, organizes a large and seemingly disparate set of laboratory observations as one consistent pattern, which explains observations from games where equity is thought to be a factor, such as ultimatum and dictator, games where reciprocity is played a role and games where competitive behavior is observed.
Journal ArticleDOI

Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interorganizational Relationships

TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the developmental process of cooperative interorganizational relationships (IORs) that entail transaction-specific investments in deals that cannot be fully specified or controlled by the parties in advance of their execution.
Journal ArticleDOI

Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests

TL;DR: This paper found that subjects are more concerned with increasing social welfare, sacrificing to increase the payoffs for all recipients, especially low-payoff recipients, than with reducing differences in payoffs.
References
More filters
Book ChapterDOI

Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a critique of expected utility theory as a descriptive model of decision making under risk, and develop an alternative model, called prospect theory, in which value is assigned to gains and losses rather than to final assets and in which probabilities are replaced by decision weights.
Journal ArticleDOI

A Theory of Social Comparison Processes

Leon Festinger
- 01 May 1954 - 
TL;DR: In this article, the authors pointed out that there is a strong functional tie between opinions and abilities in humans and that the ability evaluation of an individual can be expressed as a comparison of the performance of a particular ability with other abilities.
Book

The psychology of interpersonal relations

TL;DR: The psychology of interpersonal relations as mentioned in this paper, The psychology in interpersonal relations, The Psychology of interpersonal relationships, کتابخانه دیجیتال و فن اطلاعات دانشگاه امام صادق(ع)
Book ChapterDOI

Inequity In Social Exchange

TL;DR: The concept of relative deprivation and relative gratification as discussed by the authors are two major concepts relating to the perception of justice and injustice in social exchanges, and both of them can be used to describe the conditions that lead men to feel that their relations with others are just.
Book

The social psychology of groups

TL;DR: In this article, the authors focus on patterns of interdependence and assume that these patterns play an important causal role in the processes, roles, and norms of relationships in interpersonal relations.