Perceptions of self and other in the prisoner's dilemma: outcome bias and evidential reasoning

In the prisoner's dilemma, self-interest clashes with collective interest. The way players resolve this conflict affects how others view them. Cooperators are seen as more moral than defectors, and, when there is no information about the other player's choice, cooperators and defectors are seen as equally competent. However, players who are defected against are seen as less competent, especially if they themselves cooperated (Experiments 1 and 2). Similarly, cooperators see themselves as more moral, but not as less competent, than defectors do (Experiments 3). Independent of concerns about reputation and self-image maintenance, evidential reasoning contributes to cooperative behavior. Players who project their own attitudes onto others are more likely to cooperate (Experiments 3). Compared with classic game theory, a theory of reputational concerns and evidential reasoning is better equipped to explain empirical patterns of choice behavior in social dilemmas.     

Strategies Aimed at Reducing Gender Differences in Negotiation Are Perceived by Women as Ineffective

Sex Roles - Women often fare worse in negotiations than men. Negotiation researchers, trainers, and policymakers thus aim to find solutions—such as specific strategies for female...     

Estimating long-range dependence in time series: An evaluation of estimators implemented in R

Recent studies have shown that many physiological and behavioral processes can be characterized by long-range correlations. The Hurst exponent H of fractal analysis and the fractional-differencing parameter d of the ARFIMA methodology are useful for capturing serial correlations. In this study, we report on different estimators of H and d implemented in R, a popular and freely available software package. By means of Monte Carlo simulations, we analyzed the performance of (1) the Geweke—Porter-Hudak estimator, (2) the approximate maximum likelihood algorithm, (3) the smoothed periodogram approach, (4) the Whittle estimator, (5) rescaled range analysis, (6) a modified periodogram, (7) Higuchi’s method, and (8) detrended fluctuation analysis. The findings—confined to ARFIMA (0, d, 0) models and fractional Gaussian noise—identify the best estimators for persistent and antipersistent series. Two examples combining these results with the step-by-step procedure proposed by Delignières et al. (2006) demonstrate how this evaluation can be used as a guideline in a typical research situation.     

The Psychology (and Economics) of Trust

Interpersonal trust is a mental construct with implications for social functioning and economic behavior. We review contemporary theories of trust from behavioral economics and social psychology. Neoclassical economic theory considers trust in strangers to be irrational, but observed behavior reveals widespread trust and trustworthiness. Theories of social preferences and adherence to social norms have been proposed to rationalize trust. Psychological approaches investigate trusting behavior in terms of an underlying disposition, intergroup processes, and cognitive expectations. The breadth of these approaches illustrates the multi‐faceted nature of trusting behavior. The determinants of trust are related to the relevant characteristics of the individual, the situation, and their interaction.     

Liking persons versus liking groups: a dual-process hypothesis

Most research on liking of persons and groups has been conducted within separate paradigms, but the implicit assumption has been that the same processes govern judgments of liking or disliking regardless of the nature of the target. Departing from this assumption, we suggest a dual-process hypothesis according to which people base their liking of a target person primarily on the desirability of the person's characteristics, whereas they base their liking of a group primarily on the degree of similarity between the group and themselves. To test this hypothesis, participants were presented with either positively or negatively valenced sketches that either described an individual person or a group of people. Path analyses revealed that liking of a person was best predicted by desirability ratings, whereas liking of a group was best predicted by similarity ratings. Implications of these findings for stereotype maintenance are discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Assessing individual differences in achievement motivation with the Implicit Association Test

The authors examined the validity of an Implicit Association Test (Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) for assessing individual differences in achievement tendencies. Eighty-eight students completed an IAT and explicit self-ratings of achievement orientation, and were then administered a mental concentration test that they performed either in the presence or in the absence of achievement-related feedback. Implicit and explicit measures of achievement orientation were uncorrelated. Under feedback, the IAT uniquely predicted students’ test performance but failed to predict their self-reported task enjoyment. Conversely, explicit self-ratings were unrelated to test performance but uniquely related to subjective accounts of task enjoyment. Without feedback, individual differences in both performance and enjoyment were independent of differences in either of the two achievement orientation measures.     

Two Egocentric Sources of the Decision to Vote: The Voter's Illusion and the Belief in Personal Relevance

The decision to vote in a national election requires a choice between serving a social good and satisfying one's self-interest. Viewed as a cooperative response in a social dilemma, casting a vote seems irrational because it cannot have a discernible effect on the electoral outcome. The findings of two studies with undergraduate samples suggest that some people vote not because they set aside self-interest, but because they expect their own behaviors to matter. Two psychological processes contribute to this belief: the voter's illusion (the projection of one's own choice between voting and abstention to supporters of the same party or candidate), and the belief in personal relevance (the belief that one's own vote matters regardless of its predictive value for the behavior of others). The rationality of these two egocentric mechanisms depends on the normative framework invoked. Their relevance for actual voting behavior is indicated by their ability to account for four types of variation in turnout rates.     

Prospect theory analysis of guessing in multiple choice tests

The guessing of answers in multiple choice tests adds random error to the variance of the test scores, lowering their reliability. Formula scoring rules that penalize for wrong guesses are frequently used to solve this problem. This paper uses prospect theory to analyze scoring rules from a decision‐making perspective and focuses on the effects of framing on the tendency to guess. In three experiments participants were presented with hypothetical test situations and were asked to indicate the degree of certainty that they thought was required for them to answer a question. In accordance with the framing hypothesis, participants tended to guess more when they anticipated a low grade and therefore considered themselves to be in the loss domain, or when the scoring rule caused the situation to be framed as entailing potential losses. The last experiment replicated these results with a task that resembles an actual test. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.