Materialism Moderates the Effect of Accounting for Time on Prosocial Behaviors

Accounting for time is defined as putting a price on time. Researchers have demonstrated that accounting for time reduces the time individuals spend on others; however, its association with monetary donations has not been examined. We hypothesized that accounting for time will activate a utility mindset that would affect one’s allocation of time and money. In Study 1, the mediating effect of utility mindsets on the relationship between accounting for time and prosocial behavior was examined. In Study 2, we examined the effect of accounting for time on time spent helping and donating money, and the moderating role of material values on the relationship between accounting for time and prosocial behavior. Results showed that accounting for time activated a mindset of utility maximization that, in turn, reduced participants’ prosocial behavior; moreover, materialism moderated the effect of accounting for time on prosocial behavior.     

Double Reference Points: the Effects of Social and Financial Reference Points on Decisions Under Risk

The existing literature is inconsistent about how social comparison affects risk attitudes. We propose a framework where the total utility is composed of the social and financial utilities. The financial utility is consistent with prospect theory (i.e., an S‐shaped utility function with a financial reference point), whereas the social utility is affected by both social and financial reference points. Therefore, social risk attitudes are determined by interaction between gains/losses in both social and financial contexts. On the basis of safety‐first principle, we propose that when experiencing financial gains, individuals tend to seek upside potential and take social risks (i.e., a convex social utility function). In contrast, when facing financial losses, people would be more risk seeking in social gains but more risk averse in social losses to maximize security (i.e., an inverse S‐shaped utility function). We also propose that the relative importance of financial and social utilities depends on the saliency of the reference points and size of stakes. Studies 1 and 2 showed that individuals were risk seeking in both social gains and losses with social reference points alone. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that when both financial and social reference points were salient, participants were risk averse in both social gains and losses when facing financial gains, but risk seeking in social gains and risk averse in social losses when facing financial losses. The hypotheses derived from the theoretical framework were in general supported by our experiments. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Perceived Utility (not Sympathy) Mediates the Proportion Dominance Effect in Helping Decisions

The proportion dominance effect (PDE) refers to a higher motivation to help when the victims are part of a small (you can help 56 out of 60) rather than a large (you can help 56 out of 560) reference group. In two studies using different experimental paradigms, we investigated possible mediators of the PDE. Study 1 (N = 168) was conducted in three separate steps in order to test each link of the mediator model independently. Students read six vignettes where it was possible to help a fixed number of victims but where the size of the reference group was either small or large. When the reference group was small, helping motivation and perceived utility were higher, whereas sympathy toward the victims and perceived rights were not. A within‐subject mediation analysis showed that perceived utility mediated the PDE. Study 2 (N = 36) presented four versions of a single helping situation in a joint evaluation mode where the size of the reference group became gradually smaller in each version. All participants compared and responded to each version. Helping motivation increased as the reference group became smaller, and this effect was mediated by perceived utility rather than by distress, sympathy, or perceived responsibilities. Our results suggest that unlike, for example, the identifiability and singularity effects, which have been suggested to be mediated by emotional reactions, the PDE is mediated by perceived utility. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Impact of an individualist vs. collectivist context on the social valorization of internal explanations

The theory of the norm of internality emphasizes the role of Western individualism in the normativity of internal explanations. The present study examines the link between the social value accorded to targets expressing internal vs. external explanations and individualist vs. collectivist contexts. Sixty-three male and female French management sciences students evaluated two targets (internal vs. external) in a simulated recruitment situation. The job vacancy was partially manipulated to create individualist vs. collectivist contexts. Participants were asked to state whether or not they would recruit the targets and to describe the targets on traits relating to social utility (market value) and social desirability (likeability). As expected, the results showed that the effect of the targets' internality on recruitment judgments and perceived social utility was stronger in the individualist context than in the collectivist context. However, the analysis also revealed that the participant's gender moderated the impact of the context on the evaluation of the targets. The results showed that the context strongly affected the men's judgments, whereas it had no effect on the women's judgments.     

Simplified approaches for multicriteria decision making under uncertainty

The problem of uncertainty in the outcome of decisions has tended to be glossed over by many MCDM methods, with the exception of multiattribute utility theory (MAUT). MAUT does, however, require quite complicated preference elicitations and knowledge of the full multivariate distribution of outcomes. Results from a series of simulation studies indicate that the preference orderings of MAUT are only minimally changed when using a simple additive aggregation of marginal utilities, especially in relation to the natural imprecisions inherent in preference elicitation. It is shown in the simulations that by far the most critical aspect of multicriteria decision analysis under uncertainty is not the form of aggregation, but the correct elicitation of marginal utilities which properly represent decision maker preferences over gambles. We relate the results obtained here to other results on the approximation of distributions by three- or five-point discrete distributions, and suggest that the use of deterministic MCDM methods of any form (not necessarily value function techniques), applied to an extended formulation in which each criterion measure is repeated for three or five ‘scenarios’, can be justified.     

Simulation and multi‐attribute utility modelling of life cycle profit

Investments on capital goods are assessed with respect to the life cycle profit as well as the economic lifetime of the investment. The outcome of an investment with respect to these economic criteria is generally non‐deterministic. An assessment of different investment options thus requires probabilistic modelling to explicitly account for the uncertainties. A process for the assessment of life cycle profit and the evaluation of the adequacy of the assessment is developed. The primary goal of the assessment process is to aid the decision‐maker in structuring and quantifying investment decision problems characterized by multiple criteria and uncertainty. The adequacy of the assessment process can be evaluated by probabilistic criteria indicating the degree of uncertainty in the assessment. Bayesian inference is used to re‐evaluate the initial assessment, as evidence of the system performance becomes available. Thus authentication of contracts of guarantee is supported. Numerical examples are given to demonstrate features of the described life cycle profit assessment process. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sieges, Shipwrecks, andSensible Knaves: Justice and Utility in Butler and Hume

By examining the theories of justice developed by Joseph Butler and David Hume, the author discloses the conceptual limits of their moral naturalism. Butler was unable to accommodate the possibility that justice is, at least to some extent, a social convention. Hume, who more presciently tried to spell out the conventional character of justice, was unable to carry through that project within the framework of his moral naturalism. These limits have gone unnoticed,largely because Butler and Hume have been misinterpreted, their relation misconstrued. Exegetes have persistently misunderstood the differences that divide them, have misconceived the notion of "public utility" in Hume's account of justice, have wrongly interpreted Butler as a forerunner of Immanuel Kant, and have altogether missed the degree to which Hume stands in the tradition of Thomas Aquinas.