article jesp van dijk et al 2004 1
This 2004 JESP article (van Dijk, De Cremer, Handgraaf) tests whether fair offers in ultimatum bargaining reflect true fairness or strategic self-interest. Across two experiments, social value orientation (prosocial vs proself) moderates responses to situational cues: proselfs reduce offers when recipients lack information (asymmetric information) or have limited power (delta = 0.9), whereas prosocials keep offers relatively stable. Findings support that strategic use of fairness is mainly displayed by proselfs; prosocials' behavior reflects true fairness.
Questions this document answers
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, volume 40 (2004), pages 697–707; Available online 12 April 2004.
Received 5 March 2003; revised 21 October 2003.
108 undergraduates; 103 classified: 65 prosocials, 30 individualists, 8 competitors; proselfs N=38 (individualists+competitors).
Allocators told chips worth twice as much to allocator vs recipient; Information: Symmetric (recipient knows) vs Asymmetric (recipient unaware).
Information × Social Value interaction: F(1,99)=6.42, p<.02; proselfs offered fewer chips under Asymmetric Information (F(1,99)=17.59, p<.001).