Do self-talk phrases affect behavior in ultimatum games?

Mind and Society 21 (1):89-119 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The current study investigates whether self-talk phrases can influence behavior in Ultimatum Games. In our three self-talk treatments, participants were instructed to tell themselves (i) to keep their own interests in mind, (ii) to also think of the other person, or (iii) to take some time to contemplate their decision. We investigate how such so-called experimenter-determined strategic self-talk phrases affect behavior and emotions in comparison to a control treatment without instructed self-talk. The results demonstrate that other-focused self-talk can nudge proposers towards fair behavior, as offers were higher in this group than in the other conditions. For responders, self-talk tended to increase acceptance rates of unfair offers as compared to the condition without self-talk. This effect is significant for both other-focused and contemplation-inducing self-talk but not for self-focused self-talk. In the self-focused condition, responders were most dissatisfied with unfair offers. These findings suggest that use of self-talk can increase acceptance rates in responders, and that focusing on personal interests can undermine this effect as it negatively impacts the responders’ emotional experience. In sum, our study shows that strategic self-talk interventions can be used to affect behavior in bargaining situations.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,261

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Explaining fairness in complex environments.Kevin J. S. Zollman - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (1):81-97.
What does the ultimatum game mean in the real world?Randolph C. Grace & Simon Kemp - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6):824-825.
Emotions, norms, and the genealogy of fairness.Shaun Nichols - 2010 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 9 (3):275-296.
Distributive Justice and Empirical Moral Psychology.Christian Miller - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:Online.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-08

Downloads
21 (#741,388)

6 months
15 (#171,570)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Thinking, Fast and Slow.Daniel Kahneman - 2011 - New York: New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Social norms or social preferences?Ken Binmore - 2010 - Mind and Society 9 (2):139-157.

Add more references