The Last Dictator Game? Dominance,Reactivity, and the Methodological Artefact in Experimental Economics

The Dictator Game (DG), one of the best-known designs in experimental social science, has been extensively criticized, and declared by some to be defunct, on the grounds that its results are the product of a research artefact. Critics of the DG argue that the behaviour observed in the game (where agents frequently decide to share their money with strangers) is not the outcome of genuine pro-social preferences but must, instead, be interpreted as a response to the cues given by the experimental design, where these cues signal that the game is about ‘sharing’ (i.e. about altruism or pro-social behaviour). Despite this criticism, the DG continues to be extensively used, and some have defended its validity as an instrument capable of measuring the role of social pressure and social norms against economic motivations. This article examines the assumptions implicit in the claim that the DG results are artefactual and spells out the conditions under which the game can be used to test hypotheses about pro-social behaviour. To conclude we show how the DG debate helps to illuminate the pitfalls embedded in the abandonment of the dominance principle, and argue that this is crucial to the expanding agenda of experimental economics.     

Psychoanalysis in Postmodern Times: Some Questions and Challenges

As a consequence of the invitation to contribute this piece of writing, I acknowledge having a postmodern attitude, rather than subscribing to postmodernism as an ideology. The purpose behind this article is to reflect on the impact of postmodern times on psychoanalysis from the starting point of my own conception of psychoanalytic theory and practice. This article looks, in some detail, into the problem of truth in psychoanalysis, the issue of theory building in psychoanalysis in its relation to psychoanalytic practice, and the challenges for psychoanalysis as a pluralistic discipline. It repeatedly states that psychoanalysis evidences extreme theoretical and practical diversity, but no pluralism understood as an attitude and methodology of dialogue between theoretical orientations and practical approaches. The current challenge in psychoanalysis is, precisely, to go beyond postmodernism and to build a true pluralism on the basis on interdisciplinary exchange and collaboration.     

Reducing the risk of bias in health behaviour change trials: Improving trial design,reporting or bias assessment criteria? A review and case study

Objective: It has been suggested that randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of health behaviour change (HBC) interventions are less rigorously designed than – for example– drug trials. This study presents an approach to clarifying whether this is due to poor trial design, incomplete trial reporting and/or the inappropriateness of commonly applied risk of bias assessment criteria.

Design: First, a framework of key sources of bias and common strategies for reducing bias risk is developed based on a literature review. Second, we describe the design of a multi-site RCT evaluating the cost-effectiveness of an HIV-treatment adherence intervention (case study). The choices made by the multidisciplinary team trying to minimise the risk of bias are compared against the risk of bias framework.

Main outcome measures: Implementation of common strategies for reducing the risk of bias in the case study; alternative or additional strategies applied; a justification for each deviation from the risk of bias framework.

Results: Most of the common strategies for reducing the risk of bias could be implemented. Alternative strategies were developed for minimising the risk of performance bias and contamination. Several additional, domain-specific risk of bias strategies were implemented.

Conclusions: The literature provides useful guidance for reducing the risk of bias in HBC trials. Yet, the case study suggests that HBC trial designers may face specific challenges that require alternative/additional measures for reducing the risk of bias. Using the risk of bias justification table (RATIONALE) could lead to better-designed HBC trials, more comprehensive trial reports and the data necessary for evaluating the appropriateness of commonly applied risk of bias assessment criteria to HBC trials.     

‘Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is!’: Effects of Streaks on Confidence and Betting in a Binary Choice Task

Human choice under uncertainty is influenced by erroneous beliefs about randomness. In simple binary choice tasks, such as red/black predictions in roulette, long outcome runs (e.g. red, red, red) typically increase the tendency to predict the other outcome (i.e. black), an effect labeled the “gambler's fallacy.” In these settings, participants may also attend to streaks in their predictive performance. Winning and losing streaks are thought to affect decision confidence, although prior work indicates conflicting directions. Over three laboratory experiments involving red/black predictions in a sequential roulette task, we sought to identify the effects of outcome runs and winning/losing streaks upon color predictions, decision confidence and betting behavior. Experiments 1 (n = 40) and 3 (n = 40) obtained trial‐by‐trial confidence ratings, with a win/no win payoff and a no loss/loss payoff, respectively. Experiment 2 (n = 39) obtained a trial‐by‐trial bet amount on an equivalent scale. In each experiment, the gambler's fallacy was observed on choice behavior after color runs and, in experiment 2, on betting behavior after color runs. Feedback streaks exerted no reliable influence on confidence ratings, in either payoff condition. Betting behavior, on the other hand, increased as a function of losing streaks. The increase in betting on losing streaks is interpreted as a manifestation of loss chasing; these data help clarify the psychological mechanisms underlying loss chasing and caution against the use of betting measures (“post‐decision wagering”) as a straightforward index of decision confidence. © 2014 The Authors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.     

Choosing housemates and justifying age,gender, and ethnic discrimination

This study examines the explanations and justifications offered by those engaged in selecting housemates. The rationale for the research follows the recent housing demographic, whereby shared living has become increasingly popular among young adults in Western countries. This study sought to address the surprising lacuna in the extant research through the application of discursive psychology to understanding prejudice and discrimination within the context of contemporary social and political sanctions against openly discussing prejudice. Data were drawn from interviews with young New Zealanders aged from early twenties to early thirties who were experienced with house sharing. Detailed results are presented involving discrimination based on age, gender, and ethnicity. The study found that rigid narrow preferences were stated with respect to age, gender was less important, and ethnicity was talked about cautiously, especially if there was the possibility of significant cultural differences or language barriers.     

How to keep romance in your marriage

Pastoral Psychology -