Blog
About

4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      People making deontological judgments in the Trapdoor dilemma are perceived to be more prosocial in economic games than they actually are

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Why do people make deontological decisions, although they often lead to overall unfavorable outcomes? One account is receiving considerable attention: deontological judgments may signal commitment to prosociality and thus may increase people’s chances of being selected as social partners–which carries obvious long-term benefits. Here we test this framework by experimentally exploring whether people making deontological judgments are expected to be more prosocial than those making consequentialist judgments and whether they are actually so. In line with previous studies, we identified deontological choices using the Trapdoor dilemma. Using economic games, we take two measures of general prosociality towards strangers: trustworthiness and altruism. Our results procure converging evidence for a perception gap according to which Trapdoor-deontologists are believed to be more trustworthy and more altruistic towards strangers than Trapdoor-consequentialists, but actually they are not so. These results show that deontological judgments are not universal, reliable signals of prosociality.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 60

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk.

          Amazon's Mechanical Turk is an online labor market where requesters post jobs and workers choose which jobs to do for pay. The central purpose of this article is to demonstrate how to use this Web site for conducting behavioral research and to lower the barrier to entry for researchers who could benefit from this platform. We describe general techniques that apply to a variety of types of research and experiments across disciplines. We begin by discussing some of the advantages of doing experiments on Mechanical Turk, such as easy access to a large, stable, and diverse subject pool, the low cost of doing experiments, and faster iteration between developing theory and executing experiments. While other methods of conducting behavioral research may be comparable to or even better than Mechanical Turk on one or more of the axes outlined above, we will show that when taken as a whole Mechanical Turk can be a useful tool for many researchers. We will discuss how the behavior of workers compares with that of experts and laboratory subjects. Then we will illustrate the mechanics of putting a task on Mechanical Turk, including recruiting subjects, executing the task, and reviewing the work that was submitted. We also provide solutions to common problems that a researcher might face when executing their research on this platform, including techniques for conducting synchronous experiments, methods for ensuring high-quality work, how to keep data private, and how to maintain code security.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Development of reliable and valid short forms of the marlowe-crowne social desirability scale

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Human cooperation.

              Why should you help a competitor? Why should you contribute to the public good if free riders reap the benefits of your generosity? Cooperation in a competitive world is a conundrum. Natural selection opposes the evolution of cooperation unless specific mechanisms are at work. Five such mechanisms have been proposed: direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, spatial selection, multilevel selection, and kin selection. Here we discuss empirical evidence from laboratory experiments and field studies of human interactions for each mechanism. We also consider cooperation in one-shot, anonymous interactions for which no mechanisms are apparent. We argue that this behavior reflects the overgeneralization of cooperative strategies learned in the context of direct and indirect reciprocity: we show that automatic, intuitive responses favor cooperative strategies that reciprocate. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                11 October 2018
                2018
                : 13
                : 10
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Economics, Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ] Institute for Logic, Language, and Computation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [3 ] School of Engineering, Ècole Centrale Marseille, Marseille, France
                Universidad Loyola Andalucia, SPAIN
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Article
                PONE-D-18-18307
                10.1371/journal.pone.0205066
                6181327
                30307977
                © 2018 Capraro et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 0, Pages: 16
                Product
                Funding
                The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Prosocial Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Prosocial Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Social Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Social Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Social Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Social Psychology
                Social Cognition
                Prosocial Behavior
                Altruistic Behavior
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Cognitive Psychology
                Decision Making
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Neuroscience
                Cognitive Science
                Cognition
                Decision Making
                Physical Sciences
                Mathematics
                Applied Mathematics
                Game Theory
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Physical Sciences
                Mathematics
                Applied Mathematics
                Game Theory
                Dictator Game
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Surveys
                Custom metadata
                Dara are available at: https://datadryad.org/review?doi=doi:10.5061/dryad.jh655f3.

                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article