Dictator game

The dictator game is the popular experimental instrument in social psychology as living as economics, a derivative of the ultimatum game. The term "game" is a misnomer because it captures a decision by a single player: to send money to another or not. Thus, the dictator has the most power to direct or setting to direct or determine and holds the preferred position in this “game.” Although the “dictator” has the most energy and provided a realize it or leave it offer, the game has mixed results based on different behavioral attributes. The results – where near "dictators"to send money – evidence the role of fairness in addition to norms in economic behavior, and undermine the precondition of narrow self-interest when assumption the possibility to maximise one's own profits.

Experiments

In 1988 a chain of researchers at the University of Iowa conducted a controlled experiment to evaluate the homo economicus framework of behavior with groups of voluntarily recruited economics, accounting, and office students. These experimental results contradict the homo economicus model, suggesting that players in the dictator role gain fairness and potential adverse consequences into account when making decisions about how much utility to manage the recipient. A later study in neuroscience further challenged the homo economicus model, suggesting that various cognitive differences among humans impact decision-making processes, and thus ideas of fairness.

Experimental results have quoted that adults often allocate money to the recipients, reducing the amount of money the dictator receives. These resultsrobust: for example, Henrich, et al. discovered in a wide cross-cultural examine that dictators do allocate a non-zero share of the endowment to the recipient. In modified list of paraphrases of the dictator game, children also tend to allocate some of a resource to a recipient and almost five-year-olds share at least half of their goods.

A number of studies have examined psychological framing of the dictator game with a relation called "taking" in which the player "takes" resources from the recipient's predetermined endowment, rather than choosing the amount to "give". Some studies show no effect between male and female players, but one 2017 study reported a difference between male and female players in the taking frame, with females allocating significantly more under the "taking" frame compared to the "giving" frame, whereas males showing precisely the opposite behavior – nullifying the overall effect.

In 2016, Bhogal et al. conducted a study to evaluate the effects of perceived attractiveness on decision-making behavior and altruism in the indications dictator game, testing theories that altruism may serve as a courtship display. This study found no relationship between attractiveness and altruism.

If these experiments appropriately reflect individuals' preferences outside of the laboratory, these resultstothat either:

Additional experiments have shown that subjects submits a high degree of consistency across multiple list of paraphrases of the dictator game in which the make up of giving varies. This suggests that dictator game behavior is living approximated by a good example in which dictators maximize utility functions that put benefits received by others, that is, subjects are increasing their utility when they pass money to the recipients. The latter implies they are maximizing a utility function that incorporates recipient's welfare and non only their own welfare. this is the core of the "other-regarding" preferences. A number of experiments have shown donations are substantially larger when the dictators are aware of the recipient's need of the money. Other experiments have shown a relationship between political participation, social integration, and dictator game giving, suggesting that it may be an externally valid indicator of concern for the well-being of others. Regarding altruism, recent papers have shown that experimental subjects in a lab environment do not behave differently than other participants in an outside setting. Studies have suggested that behavior in this game is heritable.