The intuition of punishment: a study of fairness preferences and cognitive ability (Q2221268)
From MaRDI portal
!
This is the item page for this Wikibase entity, intended for internal use and editing purposes. Please use the normal view instead:
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7301432
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| default for all languages | No label defined |
||
| English | The intuition of punishment: a study of fairness preferences and cognitive ability |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7301432 |
Statements
The intuition of punishment: a study of fairness preferences and cognitive ability (English)
0 references
26 January 2021
0 references
Summary: Can differences in cognitive reflection explain other-regarding behavior? To test this, I use the three-item cognitive reflection task to classify individuals as \textit{intuitive} or \textit{reflective} and correlate this measure with choices in three games that each subject participates in. The main sample consists of 236 individuals who completed the \textit{dictator game}, \textit{ultimatum game} and a \textit{third-party punishment task}. Subjects afterwards completed the three-item cognitive reflection test. Results showed that \textit{intuitive} individuals acted more prosocially in all social dilemma tasks. These individuals were more likely to serve as a norm enforcer and \textit{third-party punish} a selfish act in the \textit{dictator game}. \textit{Reflective} individuals were found more likely to act consistently in a self-interested manner across the three games.
0 references
social preferences
0 references
third-party punishment
0 references
cognitive reflection ability
0 references
intuition
0 references
reflection
0 references
dictator game
0 references
ultimatum game
0 references
0.7168630957603455
0 references
0.6980813145637512
0 references
0.6917632818222046
0 references
0.6650257706642151
0 references
0.6632547974586487
0 references