The nature of equity-restoration: Some approval-seeking considerations

Subjects performed a proofreading task and evaluated its difficulty both beforehand and afterwards. They were overpaid or equitably paid by an experimenter who was or was not directly responsible for the level of pay they received, and who they believed would or would not see their post-test ratings. All subjects knew the experimenter would grade their task performance. Consistent with equity theory, overpaid subjects rated the task as having been more difficult than they had expected and did higher quality work than did equitably paid subjects. However, subjects who thought the experimenter would see their ratings (Aware condition) rated it as more difficult and performed more poorly on it than those who thought she would not see them (Unaware condition). Reported task difficulty increased among overpaid subjects under aware conditions, remained stable among overpaid subjects under unaware conditions, and decreased for equitably paid subjects. These findings suggested that what appears to be “equity-restoration” may be a self-presentation strategy designed to win the experimenter's approval, and that task ratings rather than performance will be used for this purpose when they can be communicated to the experimenter. The experimenter's responsibility for the subject's pay had no effect in the present study.     

The Effect of Equity,Equality, and Reward Level on the Stability of Students' Premarital Relationships

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine to what degree equity, equality, and reward level discriminate between stable and unstable premarital relationships. Questionnaires were administered to 131 American students to ascertain the level of equity, equality, and rewards in their current premarital relationships. They were tested 3 months and again 7 months after initial contact. The results demonstrate that only reward level successfully discriminated between stable and unstable relationships. In addition, equity and equality did not discriminate between groups after controlling for reward level.     

Children's affective,behavioral, and cognitive responses to social comparison

Relative outcomes in social commerce with peers are potent determinants of cognitions and behavior in young children. Although there has been considerable attention given to the behavioral consequences of social comparisons following the receipt of rewards, there has been less concern with cognitive or affective consequences. Additionally, little is known about the accrued effects of multiple social comparison experiences that may be consistent or inconsistent with one another. In the present study, young children received a constant level of reward but the amount they saw a peer receive was varied. There were two sequences of reward distribution, and in a given sequence children received either the same number of rewards as the peer (=), more (+), or fewer (?). In a 3 × 3 factorial design all possible combinations occurred. A negative inequality in reward distribution, no matter where it fell in a sequence, made children sad and inclined children to distribute fewer rewards to peers. When a sequence contained an initial experience of positive inequality, children decreased subsequent levels of self-reward. Experiencing a comparison that revealed a negative inequality in reward distribution also disrupted children's accuracy in appraising the overall distribution of rewards: even when an initial negative inequality was completely offset by an equivalent experience of positive inequality, children inaccurately concluded that they had received fewer rewards than their peers.     

Quota vs positional power in four-person apex games

In coalition formation experiments, which coalitions will form and how players in coalitions will allocate their jointly gained rewards are typically predicted as a function of the players' relative power. In this paper, we isolated two logically independent sources of a player's power: the player's contribution to the rewards obtainable by coalitions of which he may be a member (“quota power”), and the number of distinct coalitions which a player may join (“positional power”). The separation of the two types of power is clearly shown in apex games, where a single player (Apex) attempts to lure any of the other players (Base) from the coalition of all Bases. A series of four-person computer-controlled apex and nonapex characteristic function games, varying with respect to the relationship of quota power to positional power, were played by 15 quartets of male players. Quota power was strongly manifested in all outcome measures, while positional power appeared only as a bias toward equal allocations of reward when coalitions among players of equal positional power formed. Neither of two social psychological theories that are applicable, pivotal power and weighted probability theory, predicted coalition frequencies. In a test of five solution concepts, the competitive bargaining set predicted payoff allocations better than either of the two aforementioned theories, the kernel, or an equal-split model.     

Secret ambitions and public performances: The effects of anonymity on reward allocations made by men and women

The degree of equality or equity in reward allocations made by men and women is explored in three studies. Study 1 was a classroom survey which was administered after the members had completed a series of team assignments. When asked to indicate anonymously whether they would share some points with team members who had earned fewer, the men more often said yes and the women no, contradicting the patterns found in much of the literature. Studies 2 and 3 examined the hypothesis that under public conditions men and women would behave as tradition and the previous literature suggest, allocating rewards equitably and equally, respectively. In private, however, they would reverse themselves, each preferring the otherwise forbidden option. The results confirmed the prediction: when anticipating disclosure of their decisions, men chose to divide credits equitably and women equally between themselves and a less deserving partner, but when assured of anonymity, men chose more equal and women more equitable allocations. The results are discussed in light of both childhood socialization and adult constraints on sex role performances.     

The salience of the self in responses to inequity

Previous research has shown that people strive to conform with the standards of significant others in distributive justice. The present research was concerned with the role of attention to the self in the same paradigm. If people are motivated to personally evaluate their own behavior as fair, then self-focus should result in heightened attempts to redress an overpayment inequity. After the subject's criterion of a fair wage was assessed, they were paid either that amount or double it. Orthogonal to this manipulation, subjects were either made objectively self-aware (OSA) or not, by the presence or absence of a mirror. Consistent with the hypothesis, overpaid OSA subjects did more work, but of a poorer quality, than overpaid not-OSA subjects. This was taken as evidence of more zealous attempts to restore a sense of equity, implicating a greater personal need to eliminate the injustice when the discrepancy between pay level and a personal standard of fairness was made more prominent to the self.     

Children's, adolescents', and young adults' reward allocations to hypothetical siblings and fairness judgments: effects of actor gender, character type, and allocation pattern

The authors studied the reward allocation patterns, reasoning, and fairness judgments of 112 participants at 4 grade levels: kindergarten, 3rd grade, 9th grade, and college. Three story characters (an oldest, the most productive, and the physically disadvantaged) were depicted as siblings of the same gender, either sisters or brothers, who poured lemonade at a school picnic. Kindergartners' pattern of reward allocations indicated the use of an equality and productivity-based equity rule, whereas most of the older participants integrated considerations of both productivity and physical disadvantage in their allocations. Reasoning data were generally consistent with the allocation patterns. Reward allocations differed significantly by the gender of the characters, and fairness ratings differed significantly by the gender of the characters and the gender of the participant. Conclusions discuss the increasing coordination and consideration of more than one claim to the reward with development.     

Social interest,extreme response style,and implications for adjustment

As part of a series of studies examining Adler's proposition that social interest, or interest and concern for others, is a major factor facilitating personal adjustment, the research investigated the relation between social interest and Extreme Response Style (ERS). ERS was chosen as an indirect measure of maladjustment since research has confirmed Adler's contention that it is especially prevalent among neurotic individuals. In three studies involving a total of 221 subjects, inverse relations were found between a measure of social interest and ERS scores derived from four questionnaires concerning attitudes toward self, others, and a wide variety of attitudinal issues. The data also indicated that the results were not due to either apathy or repression being associated with social interest. The results provided further evidence that positive relations between social interest and adjustment are not limited to self-reports of the latter.     

Social comparison mediates chimpanzees’ responses to loss,not frustration

Why do chimpanzees react when their partner gets a better deal than them? Do they note the inequity or do their responses reflect frustration in response to unattainable rewards? To tease apart inequity and contrast, we tested chimpanzees in a series of conditions that created loss through individual contrast, through inequity, or by both. Chimpanzees were tested in four social and two individual conditions in which they received food rewards in return for exchanging tokens with an experimenter. In conditions designed to create individual contrast, after completing an exchange, the chimpanzees were given a relatively less-preferred reward than the one they were previously shown. The chimpanzees’ willingness to accept the less-preferred rewards was independent of previously offered foods in both the social and individual conditions. In conditions that created frustration through inequity, subjects were given a less-preferred reward than the one received by their partner, but not in relation to the reward they were previously offered. In a social context, females were more likely to refuse to participate when they received a less-preferred reward than their partner (disadvantageous inequity), than when they received a more-preferred reward (advantageous inequity). Specifically, the females’ refusals were typified by refusals to exchange tokens rather than refusals to accept food rewards. Males showed no difference in their responses to inequity or individual contrast. These results support previous evidence that some chimpanzees’ responses to inequity are mediated more strongly by what others receive than by frustration effects.     

A test of the self-perception explanation of the effects of rewards on intrinsic interest

An experiment was conducted to test the proposition that rewards undermine or enhance intrinsic interest in a task to the extent that individuals interpret their behavior as being motivated by the reward. It was predicted that when subjects were denied the opportunity to develop and confirm this attribution, rewards would not produce an undermining effect, but rather would enhance dispositions and behavior. Subjects were recruited to evaluate a new sugar-free soft drink. Two levels of incentives (reward-no reward), two levels of examination (opportunity-no opportunity), and three levels of outcome (good-neutral-poor) were employed. The results support the prediction that an incentive's effect depends on the examination opportunity. In the examination condition, rewarded subjects attributed their behavior more to external factors than did unrewarded subjects, but gave more negative product evaluations only after tasting it. In the no examination condition, there were no differences in the attributions made by rewarded and unrewarded subjects, and rewarded subjects were more positively disposed toward the product both before and after tasting it. These results are explained as a consequence of two properties of rewards, enhancement through reinforcement and undermining through discounting, and of hypothesis-testing processes.     

Children's understanding of equity in the context of inequality

In the context of a pre‐existing resource inequality, the concerns for strict equality (allocating the same number of resources to all recipients) conflict with the concerns for equity (allocating resources to rectify the inequality). This study demonstrated age‐related changes in children's (3–8 years old, N = 133) ability to simultaneously weigh the concerns for equality and equity through the analysis of children's judgements, allocations, and reasoning in the context of a pre‐existing inequality. Three‐ to 4‐year‐olds took equity into account in their judgements of allocations, but allocated resources equally in a behavioural task. In contrast, 5‐ to 6‐year‐olds rectified the inequality in their allocations, but judged both equitable and equal allocations to be fair. It was not until 7–8 years old that children focused on rectifying the inequality in their allocations and judgements, as well as judged equal allocations less positively than equitable allocations, thereby demonstrating a more complete understanding of the necessity of rectifying inequalities. The novel findings revealed age‐related changes from 3 to 8 years old regarding how the concerns for equity and equality develop, and how children's judgements, allocations, and reasoning are coordinated when making allocation decisions.     

Sex differences,sex-role orientation,and reward allocations

In study 1, 52 male and 52 female undergraduates allocated rewards to pairs of children for their performances in team and competitive situations. Males allocated rewards more equitably, especially when allocating to boys in competition, while females allocated rewards more equally. Boys, but not girls, who did more work received more rewards than their partner; and children with greater work inputs under competitive conditions received more rewards than children in team conditions. In study 2, the sex-role orientation of 60 college students was found to be related to their reward allocations. Males and females with a masculine sex-role orientation allocated rewards equitably, while individuals with a feminine sex-role orientation allocated rewards equally. Results indicated that sex and situational differences in reward allocations are affected by sex-role orientation and differential socialization practices by adults.Portions of study 1 were presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association Meeting, Chicago, May 1978.     

Forms of social awareness and helping

People encounter situations from different forms of awareness; that is, they can attend to different focal topics (e.g., self, other person, or other person's situation) from different perspectives (e.g., the self's viewpoint, the other person's viewpoint). Two studies assessed whether brief interactions would produce different forms of social awareness, whether the form of awareness would persist to a subsequent interaction, and whether it would influence helping in that encounter. Pedestrians on a city sidewalk were induced to become self-focused (experimenter took their picture), become other-focused (they took experimenter's picture), or empathically adopt the perspective of another person (they advised experimenter where to take a picture). In Study 1, subjects were interviewed after leaving the experimenter. First- and third-person pronoun use and self-ratings suggested that subjects had different forms of awareness. In Study 2, pedestrians participated in one of the same three interaction conditions or a control noninteraction condition and subsequently encountered a confederate in need of help. Subjects in the self-focused and empathic condition helped more than subjects in the other-focused or control condition. Results suggest that forms of awareness created in a brief interaction do persist to subsequent interactions and influence helping. Other variables may influence helping by altering forms of social awareness.     

Delay, Probability, and Social Discounting in A Public Goods Game

A human social discount function measures the value to a person of a reward to another person at a given social distance. Just as delay discounting is a hyperbolic function of delay, and probability discounting is a hyperbolic function of odds-against, social discounting is a hyperbolic function of social distance. Experiment 1 obtained individual social, delay, and probability discount functions for a hypothetical $75 reward; participants also indicated how much of an initial $100 endowment they would contribute to a common investment in a public good. Steepness of discounting correlated, across participants, among all three discount dimensions. However, only social and probability discounting were correlated with the public-good contribution; high public-good contributors were more altruistic and also less risk averse than low contributors. Experiment 2 obtained social discount functions with hypothetical $75 rewards and delay discount functions with hypothetical $1,000 rewards, as well as public-good contributions. The results replicated those of Experiment 1; steepness of the two forms of discounting correlated with each other across participants but only social discounting correlated with the public-good contribution. Most participants in Experiment 2 predicted that the average contribution would be lower than their own contribution.     

Operantly conditioning a negotiator's concession making

This study investigated the effects of a bargaining strategy that rewards the opponent's concessions. The first of four experiments revealed that a negotiator's utilization of this reward strategy resulted in large concessions by and quick agreement with the opponent. The second experiment demonstrated that the large concessions continue after the rewards cease and the third, that two previously rewarded negotiatiors subsequently make large concessions to each other and reach quick agreements. Finally, the fourth experiment added strength to a reinforcement explanation of the results by eliminating an interpretation based upon a reciprocity effect.     

The effect of organismic disadvantage on allocation behavior in children

Equity theory (Adams, 1965) suggests that when persons are asked to divide a given amount of reward between two other persons, one relatively more disadvantaged than the other at performing a task, they will make allocations that are disproportionate to the two persons' performance levels, giving the disadvantaged person a disproportionately larger share and the advantaged person a disproportionately smaller share of the reward. The theory attributes this effect to the allocator's perception that the disadvantaged individual expended a disproportionately greater amount of effort. A group of third- and fourth-graders and a group of seventh-graders were asked to divide rewards between pairs of children that were described to vary in age (“younger” vs. older) or ability (“unskilled” vs. skilled) or that were the “same” in age and ability and that were described to vary (5 vs. 15, or 0 vs. 20 baskets) or to be equal (10 vs. 10 baskets) in performance on a basketball-shooting task. Unlike the group of third- and fourth-graders, the seventh-graders generally made significantly larger allocations to the disadvantaged individuals (“younger” and “unskilled”) than to the “same” individuals, making the largest allocations under the most discrepant performance condition (0 vs. 20). Overall, the results suggested that the equity principle becomes more salient in children as age increases.     

Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism

Studied the effects of reward magnitude and comparability of the outgroup on minimal intergroup discrimination where self-interest was related to ingroup profit. Favouritism towards own group is hypothesized to arise from intergroup comparisons to enhance self-esteem as well as instrumental rivalry for group and self-interest. Sixty-two fourteen to fifteen years' old school-boys and girls were randomly assigned to a high or low reward condition in which they distributed monetary rewards, via choice-matrices, to the ingroup and a relevant comparison outgroup, and the ingroup and an irrelevant comparison outgroup. Monetary self-interest was explicitly and directly linked to ingroup's absolute profit. Ss sacrificed group and personal gain to achieve intergroup differences in monetary outcomes favouring the ingroup; and were less fair and more discriminatory towards the relevant than irrelevant outgroup. especially with High Rewards.     

Age and overt verbalization in delay-maintenance behavior in children

The influence of overt self-verbalization on the maintenance of self-imposed delay of gratification was investigated in a task in which the child's possession of accumulating candy rewards was made contingent upon the child stopping further accumulation. Preschool girls who verbalized about the goodness of waiting and preschool girls who uttered an irrelevant verbalization waited longer before terminating their delay than did preschool girls who verbalized about the delayed reward or were silent. Second- and third-grade girls who verbalized about the goodness of waiting or who were silent waited longer than girls of the same age who verbalized about the delayed reward.     

What young children think you see when their eyes are closed

The common assumption that young children egocentrically believe you cannot see them when their own eyes are closed was investigated in two studies. It was found that 2.5-4-year-olds, but not 5-year-olds and adults, would indeed often give negative reply to the experimenter's question “Do I see you?” when their eyes were closed and covered with their hands. However, they would also correctly reply that the experimenter did see their arm and an object placed in front of them and did not see their eyes and back, indicating that they were making veridical, nonegocentric inferences about the experimenter's visual experience. In addition, their eyes being visible to the experimenter did not prove to be either a necessary or a sufficient condition for their judgment that the experimenter could see “them” (“you”). It was concluded that, in this context, adults take “you” to mean their whole body while young children take it to mean primarily their face region. Speculations were made as to how young children could have acquired this meaning, and about possible similarities and differences between the self conceptions of young children and adults.     

Reward Allocations to the Extremely Mobile Employee: A Qualification of Rational Selective Exploitation

In Experiment 1, undergraduate students role-played the position of a university department head dividing rewards among a group of six hypothetical employees who varied in competence (high or low) and mobility (high, medium, or low). The departments were described as being either high, medium, or low in available rewards, and being in a high-, medium- or low-demand field. As predicted, there was a quadratic relationship between reward allocation and mobility, with greatest rewards given at the intermediate level of mobility. Experiment 2 explored the same questions, except that actual university department heads divided rewards among the same six hypothetical employees as though they were members of their own department. Department heads were grouped on the basis of the actual resources in their department and the availability of faculty in their field. There was a quadratic relationship between faculty mobility and reward allocations; this effect was most evident for high competence employees under conditions of moderate reward scarcity.