Effects of gain versus loss and certain versus probable outcomes on social value orientations

In an experiment, the effects of types of outcomes on social value orientations (individualism, competition, pro-social orientation) were investigated. Ninety-nine students made 28 choices which affected outcomes (points to be converted into money) for themselves and another (unknown) person. About half of them started out with nothing but they could allocate positive outcomes (gains) to themselves and/or the other. The other half were told that they themselves and another person would start out with some outcomes but they could lose outcomes depending on the choices. For about half the participants it was certain that their choices would result in outcomes while for the other half outcomes would be likely rather than certain. The expected utility of the outcomes was the same in the four conditions. In accordance with prospect theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more individualistic in the conditions with losses than in the conditions with gains. In accordance with social comparison theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more competitive in the conditions with probable outcomes than in the conditions with certain outcomes. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  C. McClintock,et al.  Social value related response latencies: Unobtrusive evidence for individual differences in information processing , 1993 .

[2]  D. M. Kuhlman,et al.  Individual differences in game motivation as moderators of preprogrammed strategy effects in prisoner's dilemma. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  L. Thompson,et al.  Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts , 1989 .

[4]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[5]  Ben Emans,et al.  Frames of reference and cooperative social decision-making , 1992 .

[6]  Glenn E. Snelbecker,et al.  Effects of "Framing" on measures of risk tolerance: Financial planners are not immune , 1990 .

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[8]  P. V. Lange,et al.  Beyond Self-interest: A Set of Propositions Relevant to Interpersonal Orientations , 2000 .

[9]  Andrzej Nowak,et al.  ‘Numerical trap’. A new look at outcome representation in studies on choice behaviour , 1988 .

[10]  Carsten K. W. De Dreu,et al.  Effects of gain-loss frames on satisfaction with self-other outcome-differences , 1994 .

[11]  Lola L. Lopes,et al.  [Advances in Experimental Social Psychology] Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 20 Volume 20 || Between Hope and Fear: The Psychology of Risk , 1987 .

[12]  David M. Messick,et al.  Motivational bases of choice in three-choice decomposed games , 1973 .

[13]  Charles G. McClintock,et al.  Social motivation: A set of propositions. , 1972 .

[14]  J. Schwartz,et al.  Social comparison and the inference of ability difference. , 1976 .

[15]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  The ring measure of social values: A computerized procedure for assessing individual differences in information processing and social value orientation , 1988 .

[16]  J. Grzelak.  Chapter 5 – Preferences and Cognitive Processes in Interdependence Situations: A Theoretical Analysis of Cooperation , 1982 .

[17]  T. Marteau,et al.  Framing of information: its influence upon decisions of doctors and patients. , 1989, The British journal of social psychology.

[18]  U. Schulz,et al.  The recoding of social orientations with ranking and pair comparison procedures , 1989 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[20]  Paul A. M. Van Lange,et al.  Social value orientation and intelligence: A test of the goal prescribes rationality principle , 1991 .

[21]  Wim B. G. Liebrand,et al.  The effect of social motives, communication and group size on behaviour in an N-person multi-stage mixed-motive game , 1984 .