Abstract
The rational actor model has a long and successful history of explaining human motivation across several disciplinary fields, but its focus on material self-interest fails to explain the many courtesies that people extend to each other and the frequent sacrifices they make on a day-to-day basis. What promotes this pro-social behavior—in particular trust in other people? I argue that interpersonal trust is supported by normative goals, in that people trust others, even complete strangers, because of a sense of what they ought to do, by social rules and obligations they feel they must follow. In particular, people feel they must respect the character of the other person, constrained to act as though the other individual is an honorable human being, irrespective of what they may privately believe. I describe how respect underlies trust in economic games as well as pro-social behavior in other social settings. This focus on normative goals, such as respect, suggests that people do not always act in alignment with their expectations, regulate themselves in terms their actions rather than possible outcomes of those actions, and choose pro-social action not out of desire to benefit others as much as a simple acquiescence to situational demands.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abella, A. (2008). Soldiers of reason: The RAND corporation and the rise of the American empire. New York: Harcourt.
Anderson, J. E., Dunning, D., Fetchenhauer, D., & Schlösser. (2016). No strangers here: The minimal relation effect in trust behavior. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. [Unpublished manuscript].
Anderson, J. E., & Dunning, D. (2014). Behavioral norms: Variants and their identification. Personality and Social Psychology Compass, 8, 721–738.
Andreoni, J. (1989). Giving with impure altruism: Applications to charity and Ricardian equivalence. Journal of Political Economy, 97, 1447–1458.
Andreoni, J., Rao, J. M., & Trachtman, H. (in press). Avoiding the ask: A field experiment on altruism, empathy, and charitable giving. Journal of Political Economy.
Becker, G. S. (1976). The economic approach to human behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 122–142.
Bicchieri, C. (2006). The grammar of society. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bohns, V. K., Roghanizad, M., & Xu, A. (2014). Underestimating our influence over others’ unethical behavior and decisions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 348–362.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cain, D. M., Dana, J., & Newman, G. E. (2014). Giving versus giving. The Academy of Management Annals, 8, 505–533.
Cain, D. M., Loewenstein, G., & Moore, D. A. (2011). When sunlight fails to disinfect: Understanding the perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 836–857.
Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002). Understanding social preferences with simple tests. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 817–869.
Critcher, C. R., & Dunning, D. (2011). No good deed goes unquestioned: Asymmetric cynical attributions maintain the norm of self-interest. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 1207–1213.
Croson, R., & Buchan, N. (1999). Gender and culture: International experimental evidence from trust games. American Economic Review, 89, 386–391.
Cushman, F. (2013). Action, outcome, and value: A dual-system framework for morality. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 17, 273–292.
Cushman, F. A., Gray, K., Gaffey, A., & Mendes, W. (2012). Simulating murder: The aversion to harmful action. Emotion, 12, 2–7.
Dana, J. D., Weber, R. A., & Kuang, J. X. (2007). Exploiting moral wiggle room: Experiments demonstrating an illusory preference of fairness. Economic Theory, 33, 67–80.
DePaulo, B. M., & Bell, K. L. (1996). Truth and investment: Lies are told to those who care. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 703–716.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dunning, D. (2015). Motivational theories. In B. Gawronski & G. Bodenhausen (Eds.), Theory and explanation in social psychology (pp. 108–131). New York: Guilford.
Dunning, D. (2016). Systems approaches to the treatment of motivation in human action: Three notes. Motivation & Emotion, 40, 27–30.
Dunning, D., Anderson, J. E., Schlösser, T., Ehlebracht, D., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2014). Trust at zero acquaintance: More a matter of respect than expectation of reward. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 122–141.
Dunning, D., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2010). Trust as an expressive rather than an instrumental act. In S. Thye & E. Lawler (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 27, pp. 97–127). New York: Emerald.
Dunning, D., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2013). Behavioral influences in the present tense: On expressive versus instrumental action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 142–145.
Dunning, D., Fetchenhauer, D., & Schlösser, T. (2016). The psychology of respect: A case study of how behavioral norms regulate human action. In A. Elliot (Ed.), Advances in motivation science (Vol. 3, pp. 1–34). New York: Elsevier.
Fetchenhauer, D., & Dunning, D. (2009). Do people trust too much or too little? Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 263–276.
Fetchenhauer, D., & Dunning, D. (2010). Why so cynical? Asymmetric feedback underlies misguided skepticism in the trustworthiness of others. Psychological Science, 21, 189–193.
Fetchenhauer, D., & Dunning, D. (2012). Betrayal aversion versus principled trustfulness: How to explain risk avoidance and risky choices in trust games. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 81, 534–541.
Fetchenhauer, D., Dunning, D., & Schlösser, T. (in press). The mystery of trust: Trusting too much while trusting too little at the same time. In P. Van Lange, B. Rockenbach, & T. Yamagishi (Eds.), Trust in social dilemmas. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Flynn, F. J., & Lake, V. K. B. (2008). If you need help, just ask: Underestimating compliance with direct requests for help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 128–143.
Foot, P. (1978). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect in virtues and vices. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Goffman, E. (1952). On cooling the mark out. Psychiatry, 15, 451–463.
Goffman, E. (1958). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Random House.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City, NJ: Anchor.
Haraway, D. J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
Harbaugh, W. (1998). What do donations buy?: A model of philanthropy based on prestige and warm glow. Journal of Public Economics, 67, 269–284.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.
Higgins, E. T. (1989). Continuities and discontinuities in self-regulatory and self-evaluative processes: A developmental theory relating self and affect. Journal of Personality, 57, 407–445.
Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1986). Self-discrepancies and emotional vulnerability: How magnitude, accessibility, and type of discrepancy influence affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 5–15.
Higgins, E. T., Shah, J., & Friedman, R. (1997). Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 515–525.
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Holm, H., & Nystedt, P. (2008). Trust in surveys and games—A methodological contribution on the influence of money and location. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 522–542.
Johnson, N. D., & Mislin, A. (2012). How much should we trust the World Values Survey trust question? Economic Letters, 116, 210–212.
Johnson, N. D., & Mislin, A. A. (2011). Trust games: A meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 32, 865–889.
Kamakawi, K., Dunn, E., Karmali, F., & Dovidio, J. F. (2009). Mispredicting affective and behavioral responses to racism. Science, 323, 276–278.
Kramer, R. M., & Carnevale, P. J. (2001). Trust and distrust in intergroup negotiations. In R. Brown & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook in social psychology: Intergroup processes (Vol: 4, pp. 431–450). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Lindenberg, S. (2013). Social rationality, self-regulation and well-being: The regulatory significance of needs, goals, and the self. In R. Wittek, T.A.B. Snijders & V. Nee (Eds.), Handbook of Rational Choice Social Research. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Lindenberg, S. (2015). The third speed: Flexible activation and its link to self-regulation. Review of Behavioral Economics, 2, 147–160.
Milgram, S., & Sabini, J. (1978). On maintaining urban norms: A field experiment in the subway. In A. Baum, J. E. Singer & S. Valins (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 31–40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Miller, D. T. (1999). The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 1–8.
Miller, D. T., & Ratner, R. K. (1998). The disparity between the actual and assumed power of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 53–62.
Miller, R. M., & Cushman, F. A. (2013). Aversive for me, wrong for you: First-person behavioral aversions underlie the moral condemnation of harm. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 707–718.
Pruitt, D. G., & Rubin, J. Z. (1986). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Risen, J. L., & Gilovich, T. (2007). Target and observer differences in the acceptance of questionable apologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 418–433.
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35, 651–665.
Rotter, J. B. (1971). Generalized expectancies of interpersonal trust. American Psychologist, 26, 443–452.
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.
Sah, S., Loewenstein, G., & Cain, D. M. (2013). The burden of disclosure: Increased compliance with distrusted advice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(2), 289–304.
Sah, S., Loewenstein, G., & Cain, D. M. (2014). Insinuation anxiety: The fear of signaling distrust after conflict of interest disclosures. Ithaca: Cornell University. Available at SSRN. [Unpublished manuscript]
Schlösser, T., Dunning, D., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2013). What a feeling: The role of immediate and anticipated emotions in risky decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 13–30.
Schlösser, T., Fetchenhauer, D., & Dunning, D. (2016). Against all odds? The emotional dynamics underlying trust. Decision, 3, 216–230.
Schlösser, T., Mensching, O., Dunning, D., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2015). Trust and rationality: Shifting normative analyses in risks involving other people versus nature. Social Cognition, 33, 459–482. Doi:10.1521/soco.2015.33.5.459.
Simpson, J. A. (2007). Foundations of interpersonal trust. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd edn., pp. 587–607). New York: Guilford.
Smith, A. (2015). Americans’ generosity has never been like this. CNN Money. Retrieved October 1, 2016, from http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/16/news/giving-usa-charity-donations/.
Swim, J. K., & Hyers, L. L. (1999). Excuse me—what did you just say?!: Women’s public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 68–88.
Thomson, J. J. (1976). Killing, letting die, and the trolley problem. The Monist, 59, 204–217.
Tomasello, M. (2009). Why we cooperate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tomasello, M. (2016). A natural history of human morality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Van Lange, P. (2015). Generalized trust: Four lessons from genetics and culture. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 71–76.
Wilson, R. K., & Eckel, C. C. (2011). Trust and social exchange. In J. Druckman, D. Green, J. Kuklinski & A. Lupia (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of experimental political science (pp. 243–357). Boston: Cambridge University Press.
Woodzicka, J. A., & LaFrance, M. (2001). Real versus imagined gender harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 15–30.
Acknowledgements
The article was supported by no outside funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Dunning declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Research involving human and animal participants
This article does not contain any study with human participants or animals.
Additional information
This article is based on the author’s presidential address at the annual conference of the Society for the Study of Motivation, Chicago, Illinois, May 2016. He warmly acknowledges the many contributions of his long-time collaborators, Detlef Fetchenhauer and Thomas Schlösser, to the work discussed.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dunning, D. Normative goals and the regulation of social behavior: The case of respect. Motiv Emot 41, 285–293 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-017-9616-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-017-9616-8