Money Versus Social Rank: An Empirical Investigation of Unfairness in Social Anxiety

Bică, Andreea; Crețu, Romeo Z.; Podina, Ioana R.

doi:10.1007/s10608-020-10188-z

Original Article
Published: 01 January 2021

Money Versus Social Rank: An Empirical Investigation of Unfairness in Social Anxiety

Cognitive Therapy and Research volume 45, pages 642–651 (2021)Cite this article

345 Accesses
1 Altmetric
Metrics details

Abstract

Background

Social anxiety (SA) is characterized by marked difficulties in forming and maintaining social relationships. Several theoretical perspectives suggest that individuals with social anxiety tend to prioritize social rank goals. As such, the socially anxious view the world in hierarchical rather than cooperative terms.

Methods

One hundred and eleven participants were assigned to one of three subgroups based on SA severity and depressed mood. The resulting subgroups consisted of participants with elevated levels of SA, with and without depressed mood (n = 46 and n = 24, respectively) as well as non-anxious participants (n = 41). By using an asymmetrical Ultimatum Game (UG) in which participants’ identities were concealed, we sought to investigate how SA levels modulate behavioural responses to unfair treatment and to subsequent fairness considerations.

Results

Overall, SA was associated with higher rejection rates of unfair splits, which suggests that participants with elevated SA prioritize fairness over financial maximization. Our findings also show that SA was associated with a tendency toward costly punishment, that is, both SA subgroups engaged in more punitive actions in spite of financial loss.

Conclusion

Taken together, our findings show that given the chance, individuals with elevated SA can resort to active punishment instead than acting submissively in asymmetric interactions, in partial disagreement with theoretical models of SA. We further advance that social rank threats are important drivers of punitive actions in SA. Empirical and practical implications, as well as interpretative caveats, are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the UltimatumGame_SocialAnxiety repository at https://github.com/acbica/UltimatumGame_SocialAnxiety

References

Aderka, I. M., Hofmann, S. G., Nickerson, A., Hermesh, H., Gilboa-Schechtman, E., & Marom, S. (2012). Functional impairment in social anxiety disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26(3), 393–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.01.003.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Alden, L. E., & Taylor, C. T. (2004). Interpersonal processes in social phobia. Clinical Psychology Review, 24(7), 857–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2004.07.006.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Alden, L. E., Wiggins, J. S., & Pincus, A. L. (1990). Construction of circumplex scales for the inventory of interpersonal problems. Journal of Personality Assessment, 55(3–4), 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.1990.9674088.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Alvard, M. S. (2004). The ultimatum game, fairness, and cooperation among big game hunters. In J. Henrich, R. Boyd, S. Bowles, C. Camerer, E. Fehr, & H. Gintis (Eds.), Foundations of human sociality (p. 413–435). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/0199262055.003.0014
Baker, S. L., Heinrichs, N., Kim, H. J., & Hofmann, S. G. (2002). The Liebowitz social anxiety scale as a self-report instrument: a preliminary psychometric analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(6), 701–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00060-2.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., Ball, R., & Ranieri, W. F. (1996). Comparison of Beck depression inventories -IA and -II in psychiatric outpatients. Journal of Personality Assessment, 67(3), 588–597. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6703_13.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Belzer, K., & Schneier, F. R. (2004). Comorbidity of anxiety and depressive disorders: issues in conceptualization, assessment, and treatment. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 10, 296–306. https://doi.org/10.1097/00131746-200409000-00003.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Blount, S. (1995). When social outcomes aren’t fair: the effect of causal attributions on preferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(2), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1995.1068.
Article Google Scholar
Brethel-Haurwitz, K. M., Stoycos, S. A., Cardinale, E. M., Huebner, B., & Marsh, A. A. (2016). Is costly punishment altruistic? exploring rejection of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game in real-world altruists. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18974.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Camerer, C. (2003). Behavioral game theory: experiments on strategic interaction. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
Cameron, L. A. (1999). Raising the stakes in the ultimatum game: experimental evidence from Indonesia. Economic Inquiry, 37(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1999.tb01415.x.
Article Google Scholar
Civai, C., Corradi-Dell’Acqua, C., Gamer, M., & Rumiati, R. I. (2010). Are irrational reactions to unfairness truly emotionally-driven? dissociated behavioural and emotional responses in the Ultimatum Game task. Cognition, 114(1), 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.09.001.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Coles, M. E., Gibb, B. E., & Heimberg, R. G. (2001). Psychometric evaluation of the Beck Depression Inventory in Adults with Social Anxiety Disorder. Depression and Anxiety, (Vol. 14)
Dozois, D. J. A., Dobson, K. S., & Ahnberg, J. L. (1998). A psychometric evaluation of the Beck depression inventory-II. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.83.
Article Google Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.
Article Google Scholar
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114, 817–868. https://doi.org/10.2307/2586885.
Article Google Scholar
Fernandez, K. C., Levinson, C. A., & Rodebaugh, T. L. (2012). Profiling: predicting social anxiety from facebook profiles. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(6), 706–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611434967.
Article Google Scholar
Freedman, G., & Flanagan, M. (2017). From dictators to avatars: furthering social and personality psychology through game methods. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(12), e12368. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12368.
Article Google Scholar
Fresco, D. M., Coles, M. E., Heimberg, R. G., Liebowitz, M. R., Hami, S., Stein, M. B., & Goetz, D. (2001). The Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale: a comparison of the psychometric properties of selfreport and clinicianadministered formats. Psychological Medicine, 31, 1025–1035. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329170105405.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Gilbert, P. (2000). The relationship of shame, social anxiety and depression: the role of the evaluation of social rank. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 7, 1174–189.
Google Scholar
Gilbert, P. (2001). Evolution and social anxiety: the role of attraction, social competition, and social hierarchies. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 24(4), 723–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-953X(05)70260-4.
CAS Article Google Scholar
Gradin, V. B., Pérez, A., MacFarlane, J. A., Cavin, I., Waiter, G., Engelmann, J., et al. (2015). Abnormal brain responses to social fairness in depression: an fMRI study using the Ultimatum Game. Psychological Medicine, 45(6), 1241–1251. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291714002347.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Grecucci, A., Giorgetta, C., Brambilla, P., Zuanon, S., Perini, L., Balestrieri, M., et al. (2013). Anxious ultimatums: how anxiety disorders affect socioeconomic behaviour. Cognition and Emotion, 27(2), 230–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2012.698982.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3(4), 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(82)90011-7.
Article Google Scholar
Harlé, K. M., Allen, J. J. B., & Sanfey, A. G. (2010). The impact of depression on social economic decision making. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119(2), 440–446. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018612.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Hart, T., Turk, C., Heimberg, R., & Liebowitz, M. (1999). Relation of marital status to social phobia severity. Depression and Anxiety, 10(1), 28–32.
CAS Article Google Scholar
Hope, D. A., Sigler, K. D., Penn, D. L., & Meier, V. (1998). Social anxiety, recall of interpersonal information, and social impact on others. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy: An International Quarterly, 12(4), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.12.4.303.
Article Google Scholar
Inoue, Y., Takahashi, T., Burriss, R. P., Arai, S., Hasegawa, T., Yamagishi, T., & Kiyonari, T. (2017). Testosterone promotes either dominance or submissiveness in the Ultimatum Game depending on players’ social rank. Scientific Reports, 7, 5335. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05603-7.
CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Kaufman, J., & Charney, D. (2000). Comorbidity of mood and anxiety disorders. Depression and Anxiety, 12(S1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6394.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Leary, M. R., & Atherton, S. C. (1986). Self-efficacy, social anxiety, and inhibition in interpersonal encounters. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.256.
Article Google Scholar
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1995). The self-presentational model of social phobia. In R. G. Heimberg, M. R. Liebowitz, D. A. Hope, & F. R. Schneier (Eds.), Social phobia: diagnosis, assessment, and treatment (pp. 94–112). New York: Guilford Press.
Google Scholar
Leary, M. R., Kowalski, R. M., & Campbell, C. D. (1988). Self-presentational concerns and social anxiety: the role of generalized impression expectancies. Journal of Research in Personality, 22(3), 308–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(88)90032-3.
Article Google Scholar
Liebowitz, M. R. (1987). Social Phobia. In Modern problems of pharmacopsychiatry (Vol. 22, pp. 141–173). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1159/000414022
Luo, Y., Wu, T., Broster, L. S., Feng, C., Zhang, D., Gu, R., & Luo, Y.-J. (2014). The temporal course of the influence of anxiety on fairness considerations. Psychophysiology, 51(9), 834–842. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12235.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Maner, J. K., Miller, S. L., Schmidt, N. B., & Eckel, L. A. (2008). Submitting to defeat: social anxiety, dominance threat, and decrements in testosterone. Psychological Science, 19(8), 764–768. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02154.x.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Mineka, S., Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1998). Comorbidity of anxiety and unipolar mood disorders. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 377–412. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.377.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Nowak, M. A., Page, K. M., & Sigmund, K. (2000). Fairness versus reason in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 289(5485), 1773–1775. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5485.1773.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Oakman, J., Van Ameringen, M., Mancini, C., & Farvolden, P. (2003). A confirmatory factor analysis of a self-report version of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59(1), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.10124.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Peterburs, J., Voegler, R., Liepelt, R., Schulze, A., Wilhelm, S., Ocklenburg, S., & Straube, T. (2017). Processing of fair and unfair offers in the ultimatum game under social observation. Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44062.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Rappaport, L. M., Moskowitz, D. S., & D’Antono, B. (2014). Naturalistic interpersonal behavior patterns differentiate depression and anxiety symptoms in the community. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(2), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035625.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Rilling, J. K., Gutman, D. A., Zeh, T. R., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G. S., & Kilts, C. D. (2002). A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron, 35(2), 395–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00755-9.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Robson, S. E., Repetto, L., Gountouna, V. E., & Nicodemus, K. K. (2020). A review of neuroeconomic gameplay in psychiatric disorders. Molecular Psychiatry, 25, 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-019-0405-5.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Rodebaugh, T. L., Heimberg, R. G., Taylor, K. P., & Lenze, E. J. (2016). Clarifying the behavioral economics of social anxiety disorder: effects of interpersonal problems and symptom severity on generosity. Clinical Psychological Science, 4(1), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702615578128.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Rodebaugh, T. L., Tonge, N. A., Weisman, J. S., Lim, M. H., Fernandez, K. C., & Bogdan, R. (2017). The behavioral economics of social anxiety disorder reveal a robust effect for interpersonal traits. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 95, 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2017.06.003.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Roth, A. E., Prasnikar, V., Okuno-Fujiwara, M., & Zamir, S. (1991). Bargaining and market behavior in Jerusalem, Ljubljana, Pittsburgh, and Tokyo: an experimental study. American Economic Review, 81(5), 1068–1095.
Google Scholar
Rytwinski, N. K., Fresco, D. M., Heimberg, R. G., Coles, M. E., Liebowitz, M. R., Cissell, S., et al. (2009). Screening for social anxiety disorder with the self-report version of the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. Depression and Anxiety, 26(1), 34–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20503.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Schmitt, M., Gollwitzer, M., Maes, J., & Arbach, D. (2005). Justice sensitivity: assessment and location in the personality space. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.21.3.202.
Article Google Scholar
Schneier, F. R., Heckelman, L., Garfinkel, R., Campeas, R., Fallon, B. A., Gitow, A., et al. (1994). Functional impairment in social phobia. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 55(8), 322–331.
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Stein, M. B., & Kean, Y. M. (2000). Disability and quality of life in social phobia: epidemiologic findings. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157(10), 1606–1613. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.157.10.1606.
CAS Article Google Scholar
Stigler, G. J. (1950). The development of utility theory I. Journal of Political Economy, 58, 307–327. https://doi.org/10.2307/1828885.
Article Google Scholar
Stopa, L., & Clark, D. M. (2001). Social Phobia: comments on the viability and validity of an analogue research strategy and British norms for the fear of negative evaluation questionnaire. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 29(4), 423–430. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1352465801004039.
Article Google Scholar
Tone, E. B., Nahmias, E., Bakeman, R., Kvaran, T., Brosnan, S. F., Fani, N., & Schroth, E. A. (2019). Social anxiety and social behavior: a test of predictions from an evolutionary model. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(1), 110–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618794923.
Article Google Scholar
Trower, P., & Gilbert, P. (1989). New theoretical conceptions of social anxiety and social phobia. Clinical Psychology Review, 9(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(89)90044-5.
Article Google Scholar
Weisman, O., Aderka, I. M., Marom, S., Hermesh, H., & Gilboa-Schechtman, E. (2011). Social rank and affiliation in social anxiety disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49(6–7), 399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2011.03.010.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Wittchen, H. U., Fuetsch, M., Sonntag, H., Müller, N., & Liebowitz, M. (2000). Disability and quality of life in pure and comorbid social phobia. Findings from a controlled study. European Psychiatry, 15(1), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-9338(00)00211-X.
CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar
Wu, T., Luo, Y., Broster, L. S., Gu, R., & Luo, Y. J. (2013). The impact of anxiety on social decision-making: behavioral and electrodermal findings. Social Neuroscience, 8(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2012.694372.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Yamagishi, T., Horita, Y., Mifune, N., Hashimoto, H., Li, Y., Shinada, M., et al. (2012). Rejection of unfair offers in the ultimatum game is no evidence of strong reciprocity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(50), 20364–20368. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212126109.
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Zimmerman, M., & Chelminski, I. (2003). Generalized anxiety disorder in patients with major depression: is DSM-IV’s hierarchy correct? American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(3), 504–512. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.3.504.
Article Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Psychology, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
Andreea Bică, Romeo Z. Crețu & Ioana R. Podina
Laboratory of Cognitive Clinical Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
Ioana R. Podina

Authors

Andreea Bică
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Romeo Z. Crețu
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Ioana R. Podina
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ioana R. Podina.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964.

Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Animal Rights

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bică, A., Crețu, R.Z. & Podina, I.R. Money Versus Social Rank: An Empirical Investigation of Unfairness in Social Anxiety. Cogn Ther Res 45, 642–651 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10188-z

Download citation

Accepted: 24 November 2020
Published: 01 January 2021
Issue Date: August 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10188-z

Keywords

Social anxiety
Ultimatum game
Social rank system
Costly punishment
Unfairness