Literature DB >> 32817487

Deconstructing bias in social preferences reveals groupy and not-groupy behavior.

Rachel Kranton1, Matthew Pease2, Seth Sanders3, Scott Huettel4.   

Abstract

Group divisions are a continual feature of human history, with biases toward people's own groups shown in both experimental and natural settings. Using a within-subject design, this paper deconstructs group biases to find significant and robust individual differences; some individuals consistently respond to group divisions, while others do not. We examined individual behavior in two treatments in which subjects make pairwise decisions that determine own and others' incomes. In a political treatment, which divided subjects into groups based on their political leanings, political party members showed more in-group bias than Independents who professed the same political opinions. However, this greater bias was also present in a minimal group treatment, showing that stronger group identification was not the driver of higher favoritism in the political setting. Analyzing individual choices across the experiment, we categorize participants as "groupy" or "not groupy," such that groupy participants have social preferences that change for in-group and out-group recipients, while not-groupy participants' preferences do not change across group context. Demonstrating further that the group identity of the recipient mattered less to their choices, strongly not-groupy subjects made allocation decisions faster. We conclude that observed in-group biases build on a foundation of heterogeneity in individual groupiness.

Entities:  

Keywords:  group bias; identity; income allocation; social preferences

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32817487      PMCID: PMC7474652          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1918952117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  2 in total

1.  Seeing black: race, crime, and visual processing.

Authors:  Jennifer L Eberhardt; Phillip Atiba Goff; Valerie J Purdie; Paul G Davies
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2004-12

2.  Identifying the roles of race-based choice and chance in high school friendship network formation.

Authors:  Sergio Currarini; Matthew O Jackson; Paolo Pin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 11.205

  2 in total
  3 in total

1.  Are strangers just enemies you have not yet met? Group homogeneity, not intergroup relations, shapes ingroup bias in three natural groups.

Authors:  Gönül Doğan; Luke Glowacki; Hannes Rusch
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Modelling behaviour in intergroup conflicts: a review of microeconomic approaches.

Authors:  Hannes Rusch
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Racial attention deficit.

Authors:  Sheen S Levine; Charlotte Reypens; David Stark
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 14.136

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.