Monday, 27 February 2012 09:30

Reaction to Unfairness

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)
Reaction to Unfairness

How does one deal with unfair behaviors? Today, there is unique neurobiological evidence to account for individual differences of reaction to unfairness. This subject has long been investigated by various disciplines including philosophy, psychology, economics, and biology. However, our reactions to unfairness differ from one individual to another.

Experimental economics studies using the ultimatum game (UG), in which players must decide whether to accept or reject fair or unfair offers, have also shown that there are substantial individual differences in reaction to unfairness. We combined a molecular imaging technique, an economics game, and a personality inventory to elucidate the neurobiological mechanism of heterogeneous reactions to unfairness.

Contrary to the common belief that aggressive personalities (impulsivity and anger–hostility) are related to a high rejection rate of unfair offers in UG (6–8), we found that individuals with apparently peaceful personalities (straightforwardness and trust) are more likely to reject and retaliate against unfairness. Furthermore, straightforwardness and, to a lesser extent, trust personalities mediated our finding that individuals with low 5-HTT in DRN were more likely to reject unfair offers. 

Straightforwardness is similar to honesty and implies directness and frankness in dealing with others. Trust can be defined as the general expectation of others (16, 17). Honesty is correlated with trust (18, 19), and honest and trustful persons tend to believe that most people are honest, decent, and trustworthy (17). Thus, honest and trustful persons have a higher normative expectation, a standard of behavior that they believe people should comply with. Perception of fairness depends on normative expectations, and in fact, people with higher normative expectations tend to reject more unfair offers in UG (20). 

The opposite pole of straightforwardness/honesty and trust is Machiavellianism (17, 19). Machiavellian individuals are cunning, unscrupulous, and opportunistic and behave adroitly to attain particular goals. They are generally more likely to suspect others of dishonesty (cynicism) (1). Machiavellian intelligence (also known as political intelligence or social intelligence) is hypothesized to have evolved through social complexity, in which individuals developed sophisticated strategies with a balance of competition and cooperation to achieve higher social and reproductive success (21–23). It has been shown that Machiavellian individuals accept unfair offers more in UG (24). This means that Machiavellian people with realism and opportunism behave to maximize their self-interest. However, honest and trustful persons cannot easily separate themselves from moral precepts and tend to adhere to a norm of fairness and consequently show lower tolerance of unfairness (24, 25). It should be noted that, because we did not measure Machiavellianism, our extrapolative arguments on it should be directly tested in future studies. 

In other words, higher central serotonin transmission might allow us to behave adroitly and opportunistically, being good at playing games while pursuing self-interest. However, little is known about psychological as well as neurobiological mechanisms of this observation.

Source: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/11/4281.full
This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1118687109/-/DCSupplemental.

Correspondence should be addressed to:  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


References

1. Gunnthorsdottir A, McCabe K, Smith V (2002) Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game. J Econ Psychol 23:49–66.

...

6. Pillutla MM, Murnighan JK (1996) Unfairness, anger, and spite: Emotional rejections of ultimatum offers. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 68:208–224.

7. Emanuele E, Brondino N, Bertona M, Re S, Geroldi D (2008) Relationship between platelet serotonin content and rejections of unfair offers in the ultimatum game. Neurosci Lett 437:158–161.

8. Mehta PH, Beer J (2010) Neural mechanisms of the testosterone-aggression relation: The role of orbitofrontal cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 22:2357–2368.

...

16. Rotter JB (1967) A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. J Pers 35:651–665.

17. Costa P (1991) Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO personality inventory. Pers Individ Dif 12:887–898.

18. Yamagishi T, Yamagishi M (1994) Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motiv Emot 18:129–166.

19. Ashton M, Lee K, Son C (2000) Honesty as the sixth factor of personality: Correlations with Machiavellianism, primary psychopathy, and social adroitness. Eur J Pers 14:359–368.

20. Bicchieri C, Chavez A (2010) Behaving as expected: Public information and fairness norms. J Behav Decis Making 23:161–178.

21. Humphrey N (1976) in Growing Points in Ethology: The Social Function of Intellect, eds BatesonPPG, HindeRA (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge), pp 303–317.

22. De Waal F (1982) Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex Among Apes (Johns Hopkins Univ Press, Baltimore).

23. Byrne R, Whiten A (1988) Machiavellian Intelligence: Social Expertise and the Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford).

24. Meyer H (1992) Norms and self-interest in ultimatum bargaining: The prince's prudence. J Econ Psychol 13:215–232.

25. Harrel W (1980) Retaliatory aggression by high and low Machiavellians against remorseful and non-remorseful wrongdoers. Soc Behav Pers 8:217–220.

Read 1977 times Last modified on Wednesday, 25 April 2012 16:29
Rich Wermske

My pedigree and bona fides are published elsewhere. That said, I respect that a few may wish to learn more about the private person behind the writing.  While I accept I am exceptionally introverted (tending toward the misanthropic), I do enjoy socializing and sharing time with like-minded individuals. I have a zeal for integrity, ethics, and the economics of both interpersonal and organizational behavior.

The product of multi-generational paternal dysfunction, I practice healthy recovery (sobriety date December 11, 2001).  I am endogamous in my close personal relationships and belong to a variety of tribes that shape my worldview (in no particular order):

☯ I participate in and enjoy most geek culture. ☯ I am a practicing Buddhist and a legally ordained minister. I like to believe that people of other spiritual/faith systems find me approachable.  I am a member of the GLBTQA community -- I married my long-time partner in a ceremony officiated by Jeralita "Jeri" Costa of Joyful Joinings on November 18, 2013, certificated in King County, Seattle WA. We celebrate an anniversary date of February 2, 2002.  I am a service-connected, disabled, American veteran (USAF).  I am a University of Houston alumnus (BBA/MIS) and currently studying as a post baccalaureate for an additional degree in Philosophy and Law, Values, & Policy.  I am a retired Bishop in the Church of Commerce and Capitalism; the story arch of my prosecuting and proselytizing the technological proletariat is now behind me.  I am a native Houstonian (and obviously Texan).  At 50 years old, I am a "child of the sixties" and consider the 80's to be my formative years.

As I still struggle with humility, I strive to make willingness, honesty, and open mindedness cornerstones in all my affairs. Fourteen years of sobriety has taught me that none of "this" means a thing if I'm unwilling, dishonest, or close minded.  Therefore I work hard on the things I believe in --

  • I believe we can always achieve more if we collaborate and compromise.
  • I believe that liberal(ism) is a good word/concept and something to be proud to support.  The modern, systematic corruption of liberal ideas is a living human tragedy.
  • I believe in a worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. The pragmatism of this site and my journey is rooted in both classical and social liberalism.
  • I believe in democratic elections and institutions including a media free of commercial and governmental bias.  Liberty and equality perish when a society becomes uneducated and/or ill-informed.
  • I believe in diversity of life and ideas.  Life and ideas can only flourish when the gene pool is vast and abundantly differentiated.
  • I believe in advancing balance in civil, social, and privacy rights such that all of humanity is continuously uplifted.
  • I believe in separation of church (spirituality) and state (governance) -- with neither in supremacy nor subjugation.
  • I believe in private (real or tangible) property explicitly excluding ideas, knowledge, and methods; such non-tangibles, by natural law, being free for all humanity and emancipated at conception.

While change and the uncertainty of the future may be uncomfortable, I do not fear the unknown; therefore:

    • I believe I must be willing to make difficult choices, that those choices may not be all that I desire, and that such may result in undesirable (or unintended) consequences;
    • I believe we must be willing to make mistakes or be wrong; and I am willing to change my mind if necessary.
I undertake to abide the five precepts of Buddhism; therefore:
  1. I believe it is wrong to kill or to knowingly allow others to kill.
  2. I believe it is wrong to steal or to knowingly allow others to steal.
  3. I believe in abstention from sexual misconduct.
  4. I believe it is wrong to lie or to knowingly allow others to lie.
  5. I believe in abstention from non-medicinal intoxicants as such clouds the mind.

Suicide, major depression, borderline personality, and alcoholism are feral monsters ever howling at my doorstep. However, despite my turbulent and tragic past, rare is the day where I have to rationalize, defend, or justify the actions of that person I see looking back at me in the mirror...

Website: www.wermske.com
Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in control of what content they view and what applications they use on the Internet. The Internet has operated according to this neutrality principle since its earliest days. It is this neutrality that has allowed the internet to innovate and grow. Without equal access the internet dies.