IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v22y2010i3p353-380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Status groups and altruistic behaviour in dictator games

Author

Listed:
  • Ulf Liebe

    (Universität Leipzig, Germany, liebe@sozio.uni-leipzig.de)

  • Andreas Tutic

    (Universität Leipzig, Germany)

Abstract

We provide evidence on the effects of social status in the dictator game. With regard to average donations from and to status groups, it turns out that (a) the higher the status of the dictator, the more she donates, and (b) the higher the status of the recipient, the less she receives in donations. Both tendencies are proposed by altruism. On a lower level of aggregation, we find that altruism has the highest proportion of correct predictions among all theoretical concepts under consideration (i.e. altruism, warm-glow giving, in-group bias, noblesse oblige). Surprisingly, there are rarely pure altruists on the individual level. This points at well-known problems of aggregation in social science research and challenges, among others, experimental studies on the in-group bias.

Suggested Citation

  • Ulf Liebe & Andreas Tutic, 2010. "Status groups and altruistic behaviour in dictator games," Rationality and Society, , vol. 22(3), pages 353-380, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:22:y:2010:i:3:p:353-380
    DOI: 10.1177/1043463110366232
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043463110366232
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1043463110366232?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Falk, Armin & Fischbacher, Urs, 2006. "A theory of reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 293-315, February.
    2. Hong, Kessely & Bohnet, Iris, 2007. "Status and distrust: The relevance of inequality and betrayal aversion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 197-213, April.
    3. Dufwenberg, Martin & Kirchsteiger, Georg, 2004. "A theory of sequential reciprocity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 268-298, May.
    4. Brent Simpson, 2006. "Social Identity and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Rationality and Society, , vol. 18(4), pages 443-470, November.
    5. Kolm, Serge-Christophe, 2006. "Introduction to the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity," Handbook on the Economics of Giving, Reciprocity and Altruism, in: S. Kolm & Jean Mercier Ythier (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 1-122, Elsevier.
    6. Laurence Fiddick & Denise Cummins, 2001. "Reciprocity in Ranked Relationships: Does Social Structure Influence Social Reasoning?," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 149-170, May.
    7. Toshio Yamagishi & Nobuhiro Mifune, 2008. "Does Shared Group Membership Promote Altruism?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(1), pages 5-30, February.
    8. Cox, James C. & Friedman, Daniel & Gjerstad, Steven, 2007. "A tractable model of reciprocity and fairness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-45, April.
    9. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-1458, December.
    10. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ulf Liebe & Elias Naumann & Andreas Tutic, 2019. "Prosocial Behavior Across Professional Boundaries: Experimental Evidence From Hospitals," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(2), pages 21582440198, May.
    2. Peter Bußwolder & Swetlana Dregert & Peter Letmathe, 2019. "Consequences of Unfair Job Promotions in Organizations," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 71(1), pages 3-26, February.
    3. Charness, Gary & Bartolomeo, Giovanni Di & Papa, Stefano, 2024. "A stranger in a strange land: Promises and identity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 13-28.
    4. Armenak Antinyan & Vardan Baghdasaryan & Aleksandr Grigoryan, 2018. "Social Preferences, Public Good Provision, Social Capital and Positional Concerns: Empirical Evidence from the South Caucasus," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp625, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    5. Rhosyn A. Almond, 2021. "Are you worthy of my help? An experiment in worthiness framing on charitable donations," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 21-03, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    6. Hagen von Hermanni & Andreas Tutić, 2019. "Does economic inequality moderate the effect of class on prosocial behavior? A large-scale test of a recent hypothesis by Côté et al," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, August.
    7. Zakharov, Alexei & Bondarenko, Oxana, 2021. "Social status and social learning," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    8. Jürgen Fleiß, 2015. "Merit norms in the ultimatum game: an experimental study of the effect of merit on individual behavior and aggregate outcomes," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 23(2), pages 389-406, June.
    9. Antinyan, Armenak & Baghdasaryan, Vardan & Grigoryan, Aleksandr, 2022. "Charitable giving, social capital, and positional concerns," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    10. Jin Zheng & Arthur Schram & Tianle Song, 2023. "Social status and prosocial behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1085-1114, November.
    11. Markus Tepe & Fabian Paetzel & Jan Lorenz & Maximilian Lutz, 2021. "Efficiency loss and support for income redistribution: Evidence from a laboratory experiment," Rationality and Society, , vol. 33(3), pages 313-340, August.
    12. Amelie Aidenberger & Heiko Rauhut & Jörg Rössel, 2020. "Is participation in high-status culture a signal of trustworthiness?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-23, May.
    13. Robert Neumann, 2019. "The framing of charitable giving: A field experiment at bottle refund machines in Germany," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(1), pages 98-126, February.
    14. Giuseppe Ciccarone & Giovanni Di Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2018. "Is social identity belief independent?," Working Papers in Public Economics 183, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
    15. Ciccarone, Giuseppe & Di Bartolomeo, Giovanni & Papa, Stefano, 2020. "The rationale of in-group favoritism: An experimental test of three explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 554-568.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Breitmoser, Yves & Vorjohann, Pauline, 2018. "Welfare-Based Altruism," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 89, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    2. Bruno S. Frey & Stephan Meier, "undated". "Pro-Social Behavior, Reciprocity or Both?," IEW - Working Papers 107, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1047-1060, June.
    4. Boosey, Luke A., 2017. "Conditional cooperation in network public goods experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 108-116.
    5. Antoni Bosch-Domènech & Joaquim Silvestre, 2017. "The role of frames, numbers and risk in the frequency of cooperation," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 64(3), pages 245-267, September.
    6. Andreas Leibbrandt, 2012. "Are social preferences related to market performance?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(4), pages 589-603, December.
    7. Ashraf, Nava & Bohnet, Iris & Piankov, Nikita, 2003. "Is Trust a Bad Investment?," Working Paper Series rwp03-047, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    8. Pikulina, Elena S. & Tergiman, Chloe, 2020. "Preferences for power," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. Kurt A. Ackermann & Ryan O. Murphy, 2019. "Explaining Cooperative Behavior in Public Goods Games: How Preferences and Beliefs Affect Contribution Levels," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-34, March.
    10. Polipciuc, Maria, 2022. "Group identity and betrayal: decomposing trust," Research Memorandum 005, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    11. Grohn, Jan & Huck, Steffen & Valasek, Justin Mattias, 2014. "A note on empathy in games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 383-388.
    12. Bosworth, Steven J. & Singer, Tania & Snower, Dennis J., 2016. "Cooperation, motivation and social balance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 72-94.
    13. Peeters, Ronald & Vorsatz, Marc, 2021. "Simple guilt and cooperation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    14. Ackfeld, Viola & Ockenfels, Axel, 2021. "Do people intervene to make others behave prosocially?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 58-72.
    15. Bosworth, Steven J. & Singer, Tania & Snower, Dennis J., 2016. "Cooperation, motivation and social balance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 72-94.
    16. Malmendier, Ulrike M. & DellaVigna, Stefano & List, John & Rao, Gautam, 2020. "Estimating Social Preferences and Gift Exchange with a Piece-Rate Design," CEPR Discussion Papers 14931, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Rodriguez-lara, Ismael, 2015. "Equal distribution or equal payoffs? Reciprocity and inequality aversion in the investment game," MPRA Paper 63313, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Priyodorshi Banerjee & Sujoy Chakravarty, 2021. "Dictator choice and causal attribution of recipient endowment," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 351-373, December.
    19. Peter Katuščák & Tomáš Miklánek, 2023. "What drives conditional cooperation in public good games?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 435-467, April.
    20. Fehr, Ernst & Schmidt, Klaus M., 2005. "The Economics of Fairness, Reciprocity and Altruism – Experimental Evidence and New Theories," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 66, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:22:y:2010:i:3:p:353-380. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.