Common and distinct equity preferences in children and adults

Fairness plays a crucial role in children's social life and has garnered considerable attention. However, previous research and theories primarily examined the development of children's fairness behaviors in the conflict between self-interest motivation and fairness-complying motivation, neglecting the influence of advantage-seeking motivation. Moreover, despite the well-established role of gain/loss frame in human decision-making, it remains largely unclear whether the framing effect modulates fairness behaviors in children. It was hypothesized that children would exhibit advantage-seeking motivation resulting in more selfish behaviors in the loss context. To examine the hypothesis, we combined an adapted dictator game and computational modeling to investigate various motivations underlying fairness behaviors of children in both loss and gain contexts and to explore the developmental directions by contrasting children and adults. In addition, the current design enabled the dissociation between fairness knowledge and behaviors by asking participants to decide for themselves (the first-party role) or for others (the third-party role). This study recruited a total of 34 children (9-10 years, Mage = 9.82, SDage = 0.38, 16 females) and 31 college students (Mage = 19.81, SDage = 1.40, 17 females). The behavioral results indicated that children behaved more selfishly in first-party and more fairly in third-party than adults, without any significant framing effects. The computational results revealed that both children and adults exhibited aversion to advantageous and disadvantageous inequity in third-party. However, they showed distinct preferences for advantageous inequity in first-party, with advantage-seeking preferences among children and aversion to advantageous inequity among adults. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of children's social preferences and their developmental directions.

Mechanisms of equality and inequality in mammalian societies

The extent of (in)equality is highly diverse across species of social mammals, but we have a poor understanding of the factors that produce or inhibit equitable social organizations. Here, we adopt a comparative evolutionary perspective to test whether the evolution of social dominance hierarchies, a measure of social inequality in animals, exhibits phylogenetic conservatism and whether interspecific variation in these traits can be explained by sex, age or captivity. We find that hierarchy steepness and directional consistency evolve rapidly without any apparent constraint from evolutionary history. Given this extraordinary variability, we next consider multiple factors that have evolved to mitigate social inequality. Social networks, coalitionary support and knowledge transfer advantage to privilege some individuals over others. Nutritional access and prenatal stressors can impact the development of offspring, generating health disparities with intergenerational consequences. Intergenerational transfer of material resources (e.g. stone tools, food stashes, territories) advantage those who receive. Nonetheless, many of the same social species that experience unequal access to food (survival) and mates (reproduction) engage in levelling mechanisms such as food sharing, adoption, revolutionary coalitions, forgiveness and inequity aversion. Taken together, mammals rely upon a suite of mechanisms of (in)equality to balance the costs and benefits of group living. This article is part of the theme issue 'Evolutionary ecology of inequality'.

Association between arginine vasopressin receptor 1A (AVPR1A) polymorphism and inequity aversion

Although numerous studies have focused on brain functions related to inequity aversion, few have examined its genetic basis. Here, we show the association between estimated inequity aversion and polymorphisms in three genes associated with human sociality. Non-student adult participants took part in five economic game experiments on different days. Disadvantageous inequity aversion (DIA) and advantageous inequity aversion (AIA) were calculated from behavioural responses using Bayesian estimation. We investigated the association between genetic polymorphisms in the oxytocin receptor (OXTR rs53576), arginine vasopressin receptor 1A (AVPR1A RS3) and opioid receptor mu 1 (OPRM1 rs1799971) and inequity aversion. Regarding AVPR1A RS3, participants with the SS genotype had higher AIA than those with the SL or LL genotypes, but no association was found for DIA. Moreover, we observed no aversion associations for OXTR rs53576 or OPRM1 rs1799971. The results suggest that AVPR1A plays an important role in aversion when one's own gain is greater than that of others. Our findings may provide a solid theoretical basis for future studies on the relationship between genetic polymorphisms and inequity aversion.

Social disappointment and partner presence affect long-tailed macaque refusal behaviour in an 'inequity aversion' experiment

Protest in response to unequal reward distribution is thought to have played a central role in the evolution of human cooperation. Some animals refuse food and become demotivated when rewarded more poorly than a conspecific, and this has been taken as evidence that non-human animals, like humans, protest in the face of inequity. An alternative explanation-social disappointment-shifts the cause of this discontent away from the unequal reward, to the human experimenter who could-but elects not to-treat the subject well. This study investigates whether social disappointment could explain frustration behaviour in long-tailed macaques, Macaca fascicularis. We tested 12 monkeys in a novel 'inequity aversion' paradigm. Subjects had to pull a lever and were rewarded with low-value food; in half of the trials, a partner worked alongside the subjects receiving high-value food. Rewards were distributed either by a human or a machine. In line with the social disappointment hypothesis, monkeys rewarded by the human refused food more often than monkeys rewarded by the machine. Our study extends previous findings in chimpanzees and suggests that social disappointment plus social facilitation or food competition effects drive food refusal patterns.

Distinct role of the right temporoparietal junction in advantageous and disadvantageous inequity: A tDCS study

Fairness is a hallmark of humans' ability to maintain cooperative relationships with large numbers of unrelated others. It influences many aspects of daily life, from how people share their resources with partners to how policymakers shape income distribution policy. The right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) is a hub of the mentalizing network and it has been proposed to play a key role in guiding human reciprocal behavior; however, its precise functional contribution to fair behavior in situations of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to clarify the role of the rTPJ in relation to fair behavior in situations of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity by modulating the activation of the rTPJ through transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). Anodal tDCS at 1.5 mA over the primary visual cortex (VC) or rTPJ was performed and participants subsequently played a binary-choice version of the Dictator Game. We found that anodal tDCS over the rTPJ increased the participants' equity choices in the disadvantageous inequity situation but not in the advantageous inequity situation. The tDCS effect is moderated by sex and, in particular, the tDCS effect increases female equity choices. The results suggest that the rTPJ plays a distinct role in inequity aversion in these two types of inequity situations.

Female squirrel monkeys' (Saimiri boliviensis) responses to inequity in a group context; testing a link between cooperation and inequity responses

Primates of several species respond negatively to receiving less preferred rewards than a partner for completing the same task (inequity responses), either rejecting rewards or refusing to participate in the task when disadvantaged. This has been linked to cooperation, with species that cooperate frequently refusing to participate in inequity tasks (the 'cooperation hypothesis'). However, inequity is a social response, and previous research has involved dyads, precluding studying the effects of additional social partners. While dyads allow for tighter control in experimental settings, dyadic interactions in nature do not take place in a social vacuum, so understanding the role of the social context is needed to verify that the pattern of results supports the cooperation hypothesis. Here we focus on Bolivian squirrel monkeys, Saimiri boliviensis, a highly social species that does not generally cooperate and has not responded to inequity in previous dyadic research, although they do respond to receiving a lower reward than they expected. In the current study, we provide a more nuanced test by studying female Bolivian squirrel monkeys, the demographic most likely to cooperate in both field and laboratory contexts, in a more socially relevant group setting. For some reward values, females responded in both the inequity condition, rejecting less preferred rewards when they were disadvantaged relative to their social group, and a contrast condition, wherein all animals received a lower reward than they expected, making it difficult to disentangle contrast from inequity. As in capuchin monkeys, refusals increased when monkeys were to receive low-value rewards compared to medium-value rewards. These results suggest that the relationship between cooperation and inequity responses may be more nuanced than previously suggested, with demographic, social context and reward value potentially influencing outcomes even within species.

The ontogeny of children's social emotions in response to (un)fairness

Humans have a deeply rooted sense of fairness, but its emotional foundation in early ontogeny remains poorly understood. Here, we asked if and when 4- to 10-year-old children show negative social emotions, such as shame or guilt, in response to advantageous unfairness expressed through a lowered body posture (measured using a Kinect depth sensor imaging camera). We found that older, but not younger children, showed more negative emotions, i.e. a reduced upper body posture, after unintentionally disadvantaging a peer on (4,1) trials than in response to fair (1,1) outcomes between themselves and others. Younger children, in contrast, expressed more negative emotions in response to the fair (1,1) split than in response to advantageous inequity. No systematic pattern of children's emotional responses was found in a non-social context, in which children divided resources between themselves and a non-social container. Supporting individual difference analyses showed that older children in the social context expressed negative emotions in response to advantageous inequity without directly acting on this negative emotional response by rejecting an advantageously unfair offer proposed by an experimenter at the end of the study. These findings shed new light on the emotional foundation of the human sense of fairness and suggest that children's negative emotional response to advantageous unfairness developmentally precedes their rejection of advantageously unfair resource distributions.

The ontogeny of children's social emotions in response to (un)fairness

Humans have a deeply rooted sense of fairness, but its emotional foundation in early ontogeny remains poorly understood. Here, we asked if and when 4- to 10-year-old children show negative social emotions, such as shame or guilt, in response to advantageous unfairness expressed through a lowered body posture (measured using a Kinect depth sensor imaging camera). We found that older, but not younger children, showed more negative emotions, i.e. a reduced upper body posture, after unintentionally disadvantaging a peer on (4,1) trials than in response to fair (1,1) outcomes between themselves and others. Younger children, in contrast, expressed more negative emotions in response to the fair (1,1) split than in response to advantageous inequity. No systematic pattern of children's emotional responses was found in a non-social context, in which children divided resources between themselves and a non-social container. Supporting individual difference analyses showed that older children in the social context expressed negative emotions in response to advantageous inequity without directly acting on this negative emotional response by rejecting an advantageously unfair offer proposed by an experimenter at the end of the study. These findings shed new light on the emotional foundation of the human sense of fairness and suggest that children's negative emotional response to advantageous unfairness developmentally precedes their rejection of advantageously unfair resource distributions.

Neural representations of others' traits predict social decisions

SignificancePeople's decisions about how to treat others are known to be influenced by societally shared expectations about the typical traits of people from particular social groups (stereotypes). We combined a social psychological framework, an economic game, and multivariate functional MRI analysis to investigate whether and how trait inferences are instantiated neurally in the service of behavior toward members of different social groups. Multidimensional representations of trait content were found in brain regions associated with social cognition and in a region associated with inference-based decision-making: the lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC). Only OFC representations predicted individual participants' behavior, suggesting that although stereotypes are also represented in social cognition regions, they exert influence on behavior via decision-making mechanisms centered in the OFC.

Reduced childhood social attention in autism model marmosets predicts impaired social skills and inflexible behavior in adulthood

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by social and communication impairments and restricted and repetitive behavior. Although there is currently no established cure for ASD, early interventions for deficits of attention to other individuals are expected to reduce the progression of ASD symptoms in later life. To confirm this hypothesis and improve early therapeutic interventions, it is desirable to develop an animal model of ASD in which social attention is impaired in childhood and ASD-like social behavior is observed in adulthood. However, rodent models of ASD have difficulty in recapitulating the deficit of gaze-based social attention. In this study, we examined the direction of gaze toward other conspecifics during childhood and puberty in a three-chamber test setting using an ASD marmoset model produced by maternal exposure to valproic acid (VPA). We also conducted a reversal learning test in adult VPA-exposed marmosets as an indicator of perseveration, a core symptom of ASD that has not previously been investigated in this model. The results showed that time spent gazing at other conspecifics was reduced in VPA-exposed marmosets in childhood, and that mature animals persisted with previous strategies that required long days for acquisition to pass the test. In a longitudinal study using the same animals, deficits in social attention in childhood correlated well with ASD-like social disturbance (inequity aversion and third-party reciprocity) and inflexible behavior in adulthood. Since VPA-exposed marmosets exhibit these diverse ASD-like behaviors that are consistent from childhood to adulthood, VPA-exposed marmosets will provide a valuable means of elucidating mechanisms for early intervention and contribute to the development of early therapies.

Lesion Evidence for a Causal Role of the Insula in Aversion to Social Inequity

Humans resist unequal distributions of goods in their social interactions, even if it requires foregoing personal gains. Functional neuroimaging studies implicate the insula in this aversion to social inequity and in fairness-related decisions, but a causal contribution has not yet been established. We compared the responses of 30 patients with lesions to the insula on a multiple-trial version of the one-shot Ultimatum Game, a neuroeconomic social exchange paradigm where a sum of money is split between two players, to those of 30 matched patients with brain injuries sparing the insula. Insula lesion patients accepted offers of an unequal disadvantageous split significantly more often than comparison lesion patients. Computational modeling confirmed that this difference in choice behavior was due to decreased aversion to disadvantageous inequity following insula damage, rather than due to increased decision noise or non-consideration of inequity. Our results provide novel evidence that the insula is causally involved in aversion to inequity and in value-based choices in the context of social interactions.

Reciprocity With Unequal Payoffs: Cooperative and Uncooperative Interactions Affect Disadvantageous Inequity Aversion

Cooperation among unrelated individuals can evolve through reciprocity. Reciprocal cooperation is the process in which lasting social interactions provide the opportunity to learn about others' behavior, and to further predict the outcome of future encounters. Lasting social interactions may also decrease aversion to unequal distribution of gains – when individuals accept inequity payoffs knowing about the possibility of future encounters. Thus, reciprocal cooperation and aversion to inequity can be complementary phenomena. The present study investigated the effects of cooperative and uncooperative interactions on participants' aversion to disadvantageous inequity. Participants played an experimental task in the presence of a confederate who acted as a second participant. In reality, the participant interacted with a computer programed to make cooperative and uncooperative choices. After interacting with a cooperative or uncooperative computer, participants chose between blue cards to produce larger gains to the computer and smaller for him/her or green cards to produce equal and smaller gains for both. Results confirmed our first hypothesis that uncooperative interactions would produce aversion to disadvantageous inequity. Lastly, half of the participants were informed that points received during the experiment could be later exchanged for money, and half were not. Results indicated that information about monetary outcomes did not affect aversion to inequity, contradicting our second hypothesis. We discuss these results in the light of theories of reciprocal cooperation, inequity aversion, and conformity.

Exploring the Cognitive Capacities of Japanese Macaques in a Cooperation Game

Simple Summary

Experiments using animal models are often conducted to explore the cognitive capacities of different species and to shed light upon the evolution of behavior and the mind that shapes it. Investigating the cognitions and motivations involved in cooperation is one such area that has attracted attention in recent years. As experiments examining these abilities in natural settings are underrepresented in the literature, our study was conducted in a setting closely resembling the natural environment of the study species so as to retain the social factors that help shape these behaviors. In our experiments, Japanese macaques needed to work together to simultaneously pull two loops in order to release food rewards onto a central platform. Over the course of the experiment, the macaques in our study came to make fewer attempts at the cooperative task when no potential partner was present. Furthermore, following an unequal division of the rewards, macaques receiving lesser rewards were more likely to express stress-related and aggressive behavior. Together, these results suggest that the Japanese macaques in our study understood the importance of having a partner in the cooperative task, paid attention to the relative value of the reward they received from the task and became distressed if their reward was inferior to that of another.

Abstract

Cooperation occurs amongst individuals embedded in a social environment. Consequently, cooperative interactions involve a variety of persistent social influences such as the dynamics of partner choice and reward division. To test for the effects of such dynamics, we conducted cooperation experiments in a captive population of Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata, N = 164) using a modified version of the loose-string paradigm in an open-experiment design. We show that in addition to becoming more proficient cooperators over the course of the experiments, some of the macaques showed sensitivity to the presence of potential partners and adjusted their behavior accordingly. Furthermore, following an unequal reward division, individuals receiving a lesser reward were more likely to display aggressive and stress-related behaviors. Our experiments demonstrate that Japanese macaques have some understanding of the contingencies involved in cooperation as well as a sensitivity to the subsequent reward division suggestive of an aversion to inequity.

The role of oxytocin in delay of gratification and flexibility in non-social decision making

Oxytocin is well-known for its impact on social cognition. This specificity for the social domain, however, has been challenged by findings suggesting a domain-general allostatic function for oxytocin by promoting future-oriented and flexible behavior. In this pre-registered study, we tested the hypothesized domain-general function of oxytocin by assessing the impact of intranasal oxytocin (24 IU) on core aspects of human social (inequity aversion) and non-social decision making (delay of gratification and cognitive flexibility) in 49 healthy volunteers (within-subject design). In intertemporal choice, patience was higher under oxytocin than under placebo, although this difference was evident only when restricting the analysis to the first experimental session (between-group comparison) due to carry-over effects. Further, oxytocin increased cognitive flexibility in reversal learning as well as generosity under conditions of advantageous but not disadvantageous inequity. Our findings show that oxytocin affects both social and non-social decision making, supporting theoretical accounts of domain-general functions of oxytocin.

Social and Non-social Mechanisms of Inequity Aversion in Non-human Animals

Research over the last decades has shown that humans and other animals reveal behavioral and emotional responses to unequal reward distributions between themselves and other conspecifics. However, cross-species findings about the mechanisms underlying such inequity aversion are heterogeneous, and there is an ongoing discussion if inequity aversion represents a truly social phenomenon or if it is driven by non-social aspects of the task. There is not even general consensus whether inequity aversion exists in non-human animals at all. In this review article, we discuss variables that were found to affect inequity averse behavior in animals and examine mechanistic and evolutionary theories of inequity aversion. We review a range of moderator variables and focus especially on the comparison of social vs. non-social explanations of inequity aversion. Particular emphasis is placed on the importance of considering the experimental design when interpreting behavior in inequity aversion tasks: the tasks used to probe inequity aversion are often based on impunity-game-like designs in which animals are faced with unfair reward distributions, and they can choose to accept the unfair offer, or reject it, leaving them with no reward. We compare inequity-averse behavior in such impunity-game-like designs with behavior in less common choice-based designs in which animals actively choose between fair and unfair rewards distributions. This review concludes with a discussion of the different mechanistic explanations of inequity aversion, especially in light of the particular features of the different task designs, and we give suggestions on experimental requirements to understand the “true nature” of inequity aversion.

A Shared Food Source Is Not Necessary to Elicit Inequity Aversion in Dogs

Cooperative interactions frequently result in the acquisition of resources that have to be shared. Distribution of such resources should be equitable for cooperation to be beneficial. One mechanism thought to maintain cooperation through promotion of equitable reward distribution is inequity aversion, the resistance to inequitable outcomes. Inequity aversion has been demonstrated in many non-human animal species. It is not yet clear whether inequity aversion is limited to situations in which resources are shared; however, a recent study on inequity aversion in dogs, in which reward sources were separated, failed to elicit inequity aversion, hinting at the possible necessity of a shared resource for eliciting inequity aversion. Here, we employed a modified version of the previously used paw task to test the hypothesis that a shared food source is necessary to elicit inequity aversion in dogs. In our study, an experimenter asked pairs of dogs for their paw and rewarded them equally or unequally; however, unlike the standard paw task, the rewards for each dog came from separate food bowls. Dogs displayed the typical basic aversion to inequity despite the lack of a shared food source. These results suggest that a shared food source is not necessary to elicit inequity aversion and that separation of food sources does not explain the recent failure to elicit inequity aversion in dogs. Our findings may also be reflective of the variety of situations in which inequity aversion is potentially applied, the mechanisms underlying inequity aversion in dogs, and the behavioural contexts from which inequity aversion initially evolved.

The Developmental Origins of the Social Brain: Empathy, Morality, and Justice

The social brain is the cornerstone that effectively negotiates and navigates complex social environments and relationships. When mature, these social abilities facilitate the interaction and cooperation with others. Empathy, morality, and justice, among others, are all closely intertwined, yet the relationships between them are quite complex. They are fundamental components of our human nature, and shape the landscape of our social lives. The various facets of empathy, including affective arousal/emotional sharing, empathic concern, and perspective taking, have unique contributions as subcomponents of morality. This review helps understand how basic forms of empathy, morality, and justice are substantialized in early ontogeny. It provides valuable information as to gain new insights into the underlying neurobiological precursors of the social brain, enabling future translation toward therapeutic and medical interventions.

Advantageous Inequity Aversion Does Not Always Exist: The Role of Determining Allocations Modulates Preferences for Advantageous Inequity

Previous studies have shown that people would like to sacrifice benefits to themselves in order to avoid inequitable outcomes, not only when they receive less than others (disadvantageous inequity aversion) but also when they receive more (advantageous inequity aversion). This feature is captured by the theory of inequity aversion. The present study was inspired by what appears to be asymmetry in the research paradigm toward advantageous inequity aversion. Specifically, studies that supported the existence of advantageous inequity aversion always relied on the paradigm in which participants can determine allocations. Thus, it is interesting to know what would occur if participants could not determine allocations or simply passed judgment on predetermined allocations. To address this, a behavioral experiment (N = 118) and a skin conductance response (SCR) experiment (N = 29) were adopted to compare participants' preferences for advantageous inequity directly when allocations were determined and when allocations were predetermined in an allocating task. In the determined condition, participants could divide by themselves a sum of money between themselves and a matched person, whereas in the predetermined condition, they could simply indicate their satisfaction with an equivalent program-generated allocation. It was found that, compared with those in the determined condition, participants in the predetermined condition behaved as if they liked the advantageous inequity and equity to the same degree (Experiment One) and that the SCRs elicited by advantageous inequity had no differences from those elicited by equity, suggesting that participants did not feel negatively toward advantageous inequity in this situation (Experiment Two). The present study provided mutual corroboration (behavioral and electrophysiological data) to document that advantageous inequity aversion may differ as a function of the individual's role in determining allocations, and it would disappear if individual cannot determine allocations.

Social disappointment explains chimpanzees' behaviour in the inequity aversion task

Chimpanzees' refusal of less-preferred food when an experimenter has previously provided preferred food to a conspecific has been taken as evidence for a sense of fairness. Here, we present a novel hypothesis-the social disappointment hypothesis-according to which food refusals express chimpanzees' disappointment in the human experimenter for not rewarding them as well as they could have. We tested this hypothesis using a two-by-two design in which food was either distributed by an experimenter or a machine and with a partner present or absent. We found that chimpanzees were more likely to reject food when it was distributed by an experimenter rather than by a machine and that they were not more likely to do so when a partner was present. These results suggest that chimpanzees' refusal of less-preferred food stems from social disappointment in the experimenter and not from a sense of fairness.

Domestication Does Not Explain the Presence of Inequity Aversion in Dogs

Sensitivity to inequity is thought to be an important mechanism for recognizing undesirable cooperative partners and thus crucial for the evolution of human cooperation [1]. This link may not be unique to humans, as cooperative non-human primates also react to unequal outcomes [2], whereas non-cooperative species do not [3]. Although this hypothesis has not been tested in non-primate species, studies revealed that pet dogs show a limited form of inequity aversion, responding to reward, but not quality inequity [4-6]. It has been proposed that this primitive form of inequity aversion was selected for during domestication and thus absent in their ancestors, wolves. Alternatively, wolves, which hunt, raise pups, and defend their territory cooperatively, are similarly inequity averse as non-human primates, or at least to the same degree as pet dogs. Testing similarly raised and kept pack-living dogs and wolves, we found both to be inequity averse when their partner was being rewarded but they were not for performing the same action. Additionally, both wolves and dogs reacted to receiving a lower-quality reward than their partner. These results suggest that the inequity response found in pack-living dogs and wolves is comparable to that observed in non-human primates; results from studies on pet dogs may be confounded by the dogs' relationship with humans. Consequently, our results suggest that inequity aversion was present already in the common-probably cooperative-ancestor of wolves and dogs and thus support the hypothesis of a close link of cooperation and inequity aversion.

Kea show no evidence of inequity aversion

It has been suggested that inequity aversion is a mechanism that evolved in humans to maximize the pay-offs from engaging in cooperative tasks and to foster long-term cooperative relationships between unrelated individuals. In support of this, evidence of inequity aversion in nonhuman animals has typically been found in species that, like humans, live in complex social groups and demonstrate cooperative behaviours. We examined inequity aversion in the kea (Nestor notabilis), which lives in social groups but does not appear to demonstrate wild cooperative behaviours, using a classic token exchange paradigm. We compared the number of successful exchanges and the number of abandoned trials in each condition and found no evidence of an aversion to inequitable outcomes when there was a difference between reward quality or working effort required between actor and partner. We also found no evidence of inequity aversion when the subject received no reward while their partner received a low-value reward.

What Are the Ingredients for an Inequity Paradigm? Manipulating the Experimenter's Involvement in an Inequity Task with Dogs

Cooperation is only beneficial if the outcome is equally shared between individuals involved in the cooperative interaction. A mechanism to limit the development of unequal cooperation is inequity aversion, the negative reaction to unequal treatment. While inequity aversion has been studied extensively across many animal species, it remains unclear whether inequity aversion elicited in experimental settings is directed to the cooperative partner animal or rather to the experimenter distributing the rewards unequally. In the current study we aimed to further investigate whether the presence of an experimenter distributing rewards is essential in order to elicit inequity aversion in dogs. We tested 22 dog dyads in an inequity task, requiring dyads to alternately press a buzzer in order to receive rewards of equal or unequal value. We manipulated the extent of the experimenter's involvement in the task: in the experimenter-present version an experimenter gave a command to the dogs to press the buzzer and delivered the rewards by pushing the bowls into the dogs' enclosure. In contrast, in the experimenter-absent version, no experimenter was visible and the buzzer and bowls were moved from behind a curtain. We found that dogs did not respond to the unequal treatment regardless of the experimenter's involvement in the task. Nonetheless, we found that dogs based their behavior on frustration and social facilitation in the experimenter-absent version of the task, suggesting that a social interaction with an experimenter may be one aspect necessary to elicit inequity aversion. One potential explanation for the absence of inequity aversion in the experimenter-present version of the task might be the reward delivery method. Using separate sets of reward bowls for each dog instead of a shared bowl could have removed a potentially important competitive aspect (i.e., shared resource) from the inequity paradigm. In addition, delivering the rewards via bowls, rather than directly handing the rewards to the dogs, might have caused dogs to perceive the task as less cooperative. These results suggest that both the presence of an experimenter causing inequity and the inclusion of a competitive or cooperative element in the task may be basic requirements for eliciting inequity aversion.

Young Children's Development of Fairness Preference

Fairness is one of the most important foundations of morality and may have played a key role in the evolution of cooperation in humans beings. As an important type of fairness concern, inequity aversion is the preference for fairness and the resistance to inequitable outcomes. To examine the early development of fairness preference in young children, sixty 2- and 3-year-old children were recruited to examine young children’s preferences for fairness using a forced choice paradigm. We tested how toddlers acted when they took charge of distributing resources (two candies) to themselves and others and when they were the recipients of both other-advantageous distribution and self-advantageous distribution. Different alternative options were paired with the same fair option in the two conditions. In the other-advantageous condition, children had fewer resources in the alternative options than others, whereas their resources in the alternative options were greater than others’ in the self-advantageous condition. The results showed that more children displayed fairness preferences when they distributed resources between two friends than when they distributed resources between a friend and themselves. In both scenarios, 3-year-old children were more likely to demonstrate fairness preference than 2-year-old children. The findings suggest that inequity aversion develops in young children and increases with age over the course of early childhood. When they were recipients, there was a trend in young children’s preference for fairness in the other-advantageous condition compared with the self-advantageous condition. This suggests that children might tend to be more likely to display inequity aversion when they are in a disadvantageous position.

Inequity aversion strategies between marmosets are influenced by partner familiarity and sex but not oxytocin

Cooperation among individuals depends, in large part, on a sense of fairness. Many cooperating non-human primates (NHPs) show inequity aversion, (i.e., negative responses to unequal outcomes), and these responses toward inequity likely evolved as a means to preserve the advantages of cooperative relationships. However, marmosets (Callithrix spp.) tend to show little or no inequity aversion, despite the high occurrence of prosociality and cooperative-breeding in callitrichid monkeys. Oxytocin [OXT] has been implicated in a wide variety of social processes, but little is known about whether OXT modulates inequity aversion toward others. We used a tray pulling task to evaluate whether marmosets would donate superior rewards to their long-term pairmate or an opposite-sex stranger following OXT, OXT antagonist, and saline treatments. We found that marmosets show inequity aversion, and this inequity aversion is socially- and sex-specific. Male marmosets show inequity aversion toward their pairmates but not strangers, and female marmosets do not show inequity aversion. OXT treatments did not significantly influence inequity aversion in marmosets. While OXT may modulate prosocial preferences, the motivations underlying cooperative relationships, such as inequity aversion, are multifaceted. More research is needed to evaluate the evolutionary origins, biological processes, and social contexts that influence complex phenotypes like inequity aversion. Inequity aversion can differ within species in important and distinct ways including between individuals who do and do not share a cooperative relationship. Overall, these findings support the view that inequity aversion is an important behavioural strategy for the maintenance of cooperative relationships.

Heterogeneity, Inequity Aversion, and Group Performance

We investigate the effects of inequality in wealth on the incentives to contribute to a group output when agents are inequity averse and may differ in ability. We show that equality may lead to a reduction of contributions below levels generated by purely selfish agents. But introducing inequality motivates more productive agents to exert higher efforts and help the group to coordinate on equilibria with less free-riding. As a result, less able agents may benefit from initially disadvantageous inequality. Moreover, the more inequity averse the agents, the more inequality should be imposed even by an egalitarian social planner.

Conditional cooperation and confusion in public-goods experiments

Economic experiments are often used to study if humans altruistically value the welfare of others. A canonical result from public-good games is that humans vary in how they value the welfare of others, dividing into fair-minded conditional cooperators, who match the cooperation of others, and selfish noncooperators. However, an alternative explanation for the data are that individuals vary in their understanding of how to maximize income, with misunderstanding leading to the appearance of cooperation. We show that (i) individuals divide into the same behavioral types when playing with computers, whom they cannot be concerned with the welfare of; (ii) behavior across games with computers and humans is correlated and can be explained by variation in understanding of how to maximize income; (iii) misunderstanding correlates with higher levels of cooperation; and (iv) standard control questions do not guarantee understanding. These results cast doubt on certain experimental methods and demonstrate that a common assumption in behavioral economics experiments, that choices reveal motivations, will not necessarily hold.

Payoff-based learning explains the decline in cooperation in public goods games

Economic games such as the public goods game are increasingly being used to measure social behaviours in humans and non-human primates. The results of such games have been used to argue that people are pro-social, and that humans are uniquely altruistic, willingly sacrificing their own welfare in order to benefit others. However, an alternative explanation for the empirical observations is that individuals are mistaken, but learn, during the game, how to improve their personal payoff. We test between these competing hypotheses, by comparing the explanatory power of different behavioural rules, in public goods games, where individuals are given different amounts of information. We find: (i) that individual behaviour is best explained by a learning rule that is trying to maximize personal income; (ii) that conditional cooperation disappears when the consequences of cooperation are made clearer; and (iii) that social preferences, if they exist, are more anti-social than pro-social.

Children reject inequity out of spite

When confronted with inequality, human children and adults sacrifice personal gain to reduce the pay-offs of other individuals, exhibiting apparently spiteful motivations. By contrast, sacrifice of personal gain by non-human animals is often interpreted as frustration. Spite may thus be a uniquely human motivator. However, to date, no empirical study has demonstrated that psychological spite actually drives human behaviour, leaving the motivation for inequity aversion unclear. Here, we ask whether 4- to 9-year-old children and adults reject disadvantageous inequity (less for self, more for peer) out of spite or frustration. We show that children, but not adults, are more likely to reject disadvantageous allocations when doing so deprives their peer of a better reward (spite) than when their peer has already received the better reward (frustration). Spiteful motivations are thus present early in childhood and may be a species-specific component of humans' developing cooperative and competitive behaviour.

Neural components of altruistic punishment

Altruistic punishment, which occurs when an individual incurs a cost to punish in response to unfairness or a norm violation, may play a role in perpetuating cooperation. The neural correlates underlying costly punishment have only recently begun to be explored. Here we review the current state of research on the neural basis of altruism from the perspectives of costly punishment, emphasizing the importance of characterizing elementary neural processes underlying a decision to punish. In particular, we emphasize three cognitive processes that contribute to the decision to altruistically punish in most scenarios: inequity aversion, cost-benefit calculation, and social reference frame to distinguish self from others. Overall, we argue for the importance of understanding the neural correlates of altruistic punishment with respect to the core computations necessary to achieve a decision to punish.

Local competition sparks concerns for fairness in the ultimatum game

Humans reject uneven divisions of resources, even at personal cost. This is observed in countless experiments using the ultimatum game, where a proposer offers to divide a resource with a responder who either accepts the division or rejects it (whereupon both earn zero). Researchers debate why humans evolved a psychology that is so averse to inequity within partnerships. We suggest that the scale of competition is crucial: under local competition with few competitors, individuals reject low offers, because they cannot afford to be disadvantaged relative to competitors. If one competes against the broader population (i.e. global competition), then it pays to accept low offers to increase one's absolute pay-off. We support this intuition with an illustrative game-theoretical model. We also conducted ultimatum games where participants received prizes based on pay-offs relative to immediate partners (local competition) versus a larger group (global competition). Participants demanded higher offers under local competition, suggesting that local competition increases people's demands for fairness and aversion to inequality.

Perceiving monetary loss as due to inequity reduces behavioral and cortical responses to pain

Studies indicate that physical and social pain may share some mechanisms and neural correlates. Nothing is known, however, on whether the neural activity in the nociceptive system, as indexed by laser-evoked potentials (LEPs), is modified when suffering the consequences of a conspecific violating social norms. To explore this issue, we created an interaction scenario where participants could gain money by performing a time-estimation task. On each win-trial, another player connected online could arbitrarily decide to keep the participant's pay-off for him- or herself. Thus, participants knew that monetary loss could occur because of their own failure in performing the task or because of the inequitable behavior of another individual. Moreover, participants were asked to play for themselves or on behalf of a third party. In reality, the win/loss events were entirely decided by an ad hoc programmed computer. At the end of the interaction, participants reported if they believed the game-playing interaction was real. Results showed that the loss due to the opponent's inequitable behavior brought about a reduction both in pain intensity self-reports and in the amplitude of LEPs' components (i.e., N2, N2/P2, P2a, P2b). Importantly, both the behavioral and neurophysiological effects were found in the participants who believed their deserved payoff was stolen by their opponent. Furthermore, reduction of vertex components was present only when the inequitable behavior was directed toward the self. These results suggest that, far from being a private experience, pain perception might be modulated by the social saliency of interpersonal interactions.

All inequality is not equal: children correct inequalities using resource value

Fairness concerns guide children's judgments about how to share resources with others. However, it is unclear from past research if children take extant inequalities or the value of resources involved in an inequality into account when sharing with others; these questions are the focus of the current studies. In all experiments, children saw an inequality between two recipients—one had two more resources than another. What varied between conditions was the value of the resources that the child could subsequently distribute. When the resources were equal in value to those involved in the original inequality, children corrected the previous inequality by giving two resources to the child with fewer resources (Experiment 1). However, as the value of the resources increased relative to those initially shared by the experimenter, children were more likely to distribute the two high value resources equally between the two recipients, presumably to minimize the overall inequality in value (Experiments 1 and 2). We found that children specifically use value, not just size, when trying to equalize outcomes (Experiment 3) and further found that children focus on the relative rather than absolute value of the resources they share—when the experimenter had unequally distributed the same high value resource that the child would later share, children corrected the previous inequality by giving two high value resources to the person who had received fewer high value resources. These results illustrate that children attempt to correct past inequalities and try to maintain equality not just in the count of resources but also by using the value of resources.

Peer Effects in Pro-Social Behavior: Social Norms or Social Preferences?

We compare social preference and social norm based explanations for peer effects in a three-person gift-exchange experiment. In the experiment a principal pays a wage to each of two agents, who then make effort choices sequentially. In our baseline treatment we observe that the second agent's effort is influenced by the effort choice of the first agent, even though there are no material spillovers between agents. This peer effect is predicted by the Fehr-Schmidt (1999) model of social preferences. As we show from a norms-elicitation experiment, it is also consistent with social norms compliance. A conditional logit investigation of the explanatory power of payoff inequality and elicited norms finds that the second agent's effort is best explained by the social preferences model. In further experiments we find that the peer effects change as predicted by the social preferences model. Again, a conditional logit analysis favors an explanation based on social preferences, rather than social norms. Our results suggest that, in our context, the social preferences model provides a parsimonious explanation for the observed peer effect.