Abstract
Psychological studies have long demonstrated effects of expectations on judgment, whereby the provision of information, either implicitly or explicitly, prior to an experience or decision can exert a substantial influence on the observed behavior. This study extended these expectation effects to the domain of interactive economic decision-making. Prior to playing a commonly-used bargaining task, the Ultimatum Game, participants were primed to expect offers that would be either relatively fair (a roughly equal split of an endowed amount) or unfair (an unequal split, to the participant’s disadvantage). A third group played the Game without receiving any prior information about expected offers. As predicted, these expectations had a large effect on decisions made by participants in the Ultimatum Game, with those with expectations of fairness rejecting significantly more unfair offers than those participants who expected low offers. Implications for models of fairness and equity are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allison RI, Uhl KP (1964) Influence of beer brand identification on taste perception. J Marketing Res 1:36–39
Amanzio M, Benedetti F (1999) Neuropharmacological dissection of placebo analgesia: expectation-activated opioid systems versus conditioning-activated specific subsystems. J Neurosci 19:484–494
Blount S (1995) When social outcomes aren’t fair: the effect of causal attributions on preferences. Organ Behav Hum Dec 63:131–144
Bohnet I, Zeckhauser R (2004) Social comparisons in ultimatum bargaining. Scand J Econ 106:495–510
Bolton G, Ockenfels A (2000) ERC: a theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. Am Econ Rev 90:166–193
Bolton GE, Zwick R (1995) Anonymity versus punishment in ultimatum bargaining. Game Econ Behav 10:95–121
Calder AJ, Lawrence AD, Young AW (2001) Neuropsychology of fear and loathing. Nat Rev Neurosci 2:352–363
Camerer CF (2003) Behavioral game theory. Princeton, Princeton University Press
Cason TN, Mui VL (1998) Social influence in the sequential Dictator game. J Math Psychol 42:248–265
Charness G, Rabin M (2002) Understanding social preferences with simple tests. Q J Econ 117:817–870
Critchley HD, Elliott R, Mathias CJ, Dolan RJ (2000) Neural activity relating to generation and representation of galvanic skin conductance responses: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurosci 20:3033–3040
Delgado MR, Frank RH, Phelps EA (2005) Perceptions of moral character modulate the neural systems of reward during the trust game. Nat Neurosci 8:1611–1618
Derbyshire SW, Jones AKP, Gyulai F (1997) Pain processing during three levels of noxious stimulation produces differential patterns of central activity. Pain 73:431–445
Eckel C, Grossman P (2001) Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Econ Inq 39:171–188
Falk A, Fischbacher U (2006) A theory of reciprocity. Game Econ Behav 54:293–315
Fehr E, Schmidt KM (1999) A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Q J Econ 114:817–868
Guth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarz B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Behav Organ 3:376–388
Harle K, Sanfey AG (2007) Sadness biases social economic decisions in the ultimatum game. Emotion 7:876–881
Klaaren KJ, Hodges SD, Wilson TD (1994) The role of affective expectations in subjective experience and decision-making. Soc Cognition 12:77–101
Knez MJ, Camerer CF (1995) Outside options and social comparison in three-player ultimatum game experiments. Game Econ Behav 10:65–94
Koenigs M, Tranel D (2007) Irrational economic decision-making after ventromedial prefrontal damage: evidence from the ultimatum game. J Neurosci 27:951–956
Kopelman S, Rosette AS, Thompson L (2006) The three faces of Eve: strategic displays of positive, negative, and neutral emotions in negotiations. Organ Behav Hum Dec 99:81–101
Lee L, Frederick S, Ariely D (2006) Try it, you’ll like it: the influence of expectation, consumption, and revelation on preferences for beer. Psychol Sci 17:1054–1058
List JA, Cherry TL (2000) Learning to accept in ultimatum games: evidence from an experimental design that generates low offers. Exp Econ 3:11–29
Loewenstein GF, Thompson L, Bazerman MH (1989) Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. J Pers Soc Psychol 57:426–441
McCabe K, Houser D, Ryan L, Smith V, Trouard T (2001) A functional imaging study of cooperation in two-person reciprocal exchange. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:11832–11835
McClure SM, Li J, Tomlin D, Cypert K, Montague L, Montague P (2004) Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks. Neuron 44:379–387
Nowak MA, Page KM, Sigmund K (2000) Fairness versus reason in the ultimatum game. Science 289:1773–1775
Pillutla MM, Murnighan JK (1996) Unfairness, anger, and spite: emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ Behav Hum Dec 68:208–224
Plassman H, O’Doherty J, Shiv B, Rangel A (2008) Marketing actions can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:1050–1054
Rilling JK, Gutman DA, Zeh TR, Pagnoni G, Berns GS, Kilts CD (2002) A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron 35:395–405
Sanfey AG, Rilling JK, Aronson JA, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD (2003) The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science 300:1755–1758
Sanfey AG, Loewenstein G, McClure SM, Cohen JD (2006) Neuroeconomics: cross-currents in research on decision-making. Trends Cogn Sci 10:108–116
Shiv B, Carmon Z, Ariely D (2005) Placebo effects of marketing actions: consumers may get what they pay for. J Marketing Res 42:383–393
Slovic P (1995) The construction of preference. Am Psychol 50:364–371
van Kleef GA, De Dreu CKW, Manstead ASR (2004) The interpersonal effects of anger and happiness in negotiations. J Pers Soc Psychol 86:57–76
von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, Princeton University Press
Xiao E, Houser D (2005) Emotion expression in human punishment behavior. P Natl Acad Sci USA 102:7398–7401
Acknowledgments
The author is grateful for the assistance of K. Martin and L. Suchoski, and for the comments of N. Bonini, R. Viale, and three anonymous reviewers. This research was supported by NIMH R03MH077058.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sanfey, A.G. Expectations and social decision-making: biasing effects of prior knowledge on Ultimatum responses. Mind Soc 8, 93–107 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-009-0053-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-009-0053-6