The effect of social categorization on trust decisions in a trust game paradigm

The interplay between the proposer's role model and moral behavior modulates proposal processing in the Ultimatum Game: An ERP study

Economic decision-making plays a paramount role in both individual and national interests. Individuals have fairness preferences in economic decision-making, but a proposer's moral-related information may affect fairness considerations. In prior ERP studies, researchers have suggested moral identity influences fairness preferences in the Ultimatum Game (UG), but there are discrepancies in the results. Furthermore, whether role models (individuals whom someone else looks to help decide suitable behaviors), who can modulate people's moral standards, can affect fairness concerns in UG is still understudied. To address the questions, we selected the moral-related statements by eliminating those with illegal information and employed the ERP technique to explore whether the interplay of the proposer's role model and moral-related behavior influenced fairness processing in the modified UG and the corresponding neural mechanisms. We mainly found that the aforementioned interaction effect on proposal considerations in UG could be mirrored in both rejection rates and P300 variations. The results demonstrate that the interaction between the proposer's role model and moral behavior can modulate fairness concerns in UG. Our current work provides new avenues for elucidating the time course of the influencing mechanism of fair distributions in complicated social environments.

Moral transgression modulates fairness considerations in the ultimatum game: Evidence from ERP and EEG data

People tend to dislike and punish unfair behaviors in social interactions, and this disposition may be moderated by the characteristics of their interaction partner. We used a modified ultimatum game (UG) to investigate players' responses to fair and unfair offers from proposers described as having performed either a moral transgression or a neutral behavior, and recorded an electroencephalogram. The participants' behavior in the UG suggests that people quickly demand more fairness from proposers who have committed moral transgressions rather than neutral behavior. Event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed a significant effect of offer type and of proposer type on P300 activity. The prestimulus α-oscillation power in the neutral behavior condition was significantly lower than that in the moral transgression condition. The post-stimulus β-event-related synchronization (β-ERS) was larger for the moral transgression condition than the neutral behavior condition in response to the least fair offers, and larger for neutral behavior than the moral transgression condition in response to the fairest offers. In summary, β-ERS was influenced by both proposer type and offer type, which revealed different neural responses to the offer from either a morally transgressive or a neutral behavior proposer.

Superior bias in trust-related decisions

Trust is conditional. Many studies have revealed its relative conditions in different situations, but when social status is characteristic of the person who receives trust (the “trustee”), our knowledge of how social status affects trust still remains limited. In this study, we used the trust game in order to: (1) characterize the effect of trustees’ social hierarchy on trust-related decisions in different trustworthiness situations and (2) explore the underlying computational process regarding the impact that social status has on trust-related decisions by using the computational modeling approach to integrate social status into trust-related situations. In Experiment 1, using a one-shot trust game with no feedback of information about reciprocity, we found that compared with inferiors, superiors gained more trust-related behaviors (investments) in spite of the fact that they were not rated as having higher trustworthiness. Then, in Experiment 2, when we controlled the trustworthiness of different social status partners by providing the same neutral reciprocity rate (50%) in a repeated trust game, the high-status partner gained more trust than the low-status partner. This superior bias extended to Experiment 3a and 3b, in which we set different levels of trustworthiness to match the different social statuses of partners. With respect to modeling results, we found that higher status holds an additional social value independent of trust profit, resulting in superior bias. Ultimately, this study has shed light on the superior bias that commonly leads people to grant high-status individuals goodwill in social interactions.

Justification of Sentencing Decisions: Development of a Ratio-Based Measure Tested on Child Neglect Cases

Theoretically, people's justification of a sentencing decision involves a hybrid structure comprising retribution, incapacitation, general deterrence, and rehabilitation. In this study, a new ratio-type measure was developed to assess this structure and was tested to detect changes in the weighting of justification according to the content emphasized in a particular crime. Two child neglect scenarios were presented to participants, where they read either a severe-damage scenario (where a single mother's selfish neglect caused her son's death) or a moderate-damage scenario (where a single mother became apathetic due to economic deprivation and caused her child's debilitation). Participants then indicated the proportion of importance they placed on each justification in determining the defendant's punishment, with an overall proportion of 100%, along with responding to the sentence on an 11-point scale. This study involved a two-factor analysis of variance for justification ratios, a t-test for the sentence, and a multiple regression analysis with three demographic variables, the four justifications as independent variables, and the sentence as the dependent variable. The ratio of retribution to rehabilitation was reversed depending on the scenario: in the severe-damage scenario, retribution was weighted highest at 27.0% and rehabilitation was weighted at only 19.0%. By contrast, in the moderate-damage scenario, rehabilitation had the highest weighting of about 26.2%, while retribution was weighted at 21.5%. The sentence was more severe in the severe-damage scenario. Multiple regression analysis suggested that in the severe-damage scenario, most participants failed to deviate from choosing retribution by default and decided on heavier sentences, while some who considered rehabilitation and incapacitation opted for lighter sentences. The present measure succeeded in detecting changes in the weighting of justification, which can be difficult to detect with common Likert Scales. In addition, it was found that not only retribution but utilitarian justification was considered in the sentencing decisions of serious cases.

Influence of Emojis on Online Trust Among College Students

Emojis are increasingly used in online communication and expression, however, most previous studies have focused on describing this phenomenon, but less on how it affects interpersonal trust relationships. Therefore, this study examines the effect of emojis on online interpersonal trust among college students through three experiments. A total of 62 college students were recruited for Experiment 1. The results demonstrated that positive emoji () improved the level of trust of trustors in the trust game [t(60) = –2.79, p = 0.007], whereas that of the control group exerted no effect on the initial level of online trust among college students. Then, 74 college students were selected for Experiment 2. The results indicated no significant differences between the experiment and control groups in terms of the influence of negative emojis () on initial online trust using. A joint analysis (via ANOVA) of Experiments 1 and 2 illustrated that the type of emoji exerted a significant effect [F(2,96) = 3.96, p = 0.02, η² = 0.08] on college students’ online trust. Finally, we recruited 111 participants for Experiment 3 to explore the role of emojis on online trust among acquaintances. The results suggested that the individual propensity to trust plays a moderate role in the relationship between emojis and online trust among acquaintances. That is, emojis influenced interpersonal trust among acquaintances only if the level of propensity to trust, is low.

How Adolescents and Adults Learn About Changes in the Trustworthiness of Others Through Dynamic Interaction

Whether to trust or distrust another individual is a complex interpersonal challenge, especially when such individuals behave inconsistently. It is still unclear as to how individuals learn and adapt to fluctuations in the trustworthiness of others and how this process changes from adolescence to adulthood. To address these issues, we implemented repeated rounds of a trust game within the context of a complicated and changeable interpersonal environment. Specifically, adolescents and adults played the role of trustors who had to decide whether to invest money in two anonymous partners carrying the risk of no reciprocation. Unbeknownst to participants, these two partners had different trustworthiness profiles: one partner initially yielded a higher initial return rate (70%) while the other initially yielded a lower initial return rate (30%). Crucially, over repeated rounds, these two partners gradually changed their responses to the point where, finally, return rates were both neutral (50%). Results indicated that all participants showed less updating in the negative direction in response to good-to-neutral partners while more updating in the positive direction in response to the bad-to-neutral partner. Compared to adults, this behavioral disparity in responses to good-to-neutral and bad-to-neutral partners was less pronounced in adolescents. Based on the computational modeling approach, the potential mechanisms underlying their behavioral patterns were revealed: the higher learning rate promoted flexible adaptions in participants to untrustworthy trustees as they changed to neutral. The less pronounced distinction between good-to-neutral and bad-to-neutral partners in adolescents was related to their lower learning rate. Overall, our study extends the understanding of trust behavior to a fluctuating social context and highlights the role of social learning in social emotion and interaction.

Category-Based Learning About Deviant Outgroup Members Hinders Performance in Trust Decision Making

The present research examines whether individuation and categorization processes influence trust decisions about strangers at first and across repeated interactions. In a partial replication of the study reported by Cañadas et al. (2015), participants played an adaptation of the multi-round trust game paradigm and had to decide whether or not to cooperate with unknown partners. Gender (Study 1a) and ethnicity (Studies 1b, 2, and 3) served to create distinct social categories among the game partners, whose reciprocation rates were manipulated at group and individual levels. At the group level, two social groups (i.e., ingroup vs. outgroup) were associated with opposite reciprocation rates (i.e., high vs. low reciprocation rate). At the individual level, consistency was manipulated by altering the reciprocation rate of one out of four members of each social group. That is, there was one inconsistent individual in each group showing a pattern of reciprocation opposite to the group reciprocation rate. Our data, contrary to Cañadas et al.'s (2015) findings, suggested that ingroup partners were individuated given that participants made their decisions to cooperate with the trustees according to their individual reciprocation rate and independently of the group reciprocation rate. In contrast, decisions about outgroup partners (i.e., men in Study 1a and Blacks in Studies 1b, 2, and 3) were affected by category-based thinking. At the same time, in comparison with ingroup, greater cooperation was observed with ethnic outgroups but not with gender outgroups. The consistency of our results with the previous literature on social categorization and across the three experiments seems to indicate they are reliable, supporting the hypothesis that categorization and individuation processes guide trust decision-making, promoting individuation mainly for ingroup and categorization among outgroup members.