researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Human Behavior and Evolution Society of Japan  

Based on the dual-process theory, we hypothesized that cooperators in the one-shot prisoner’s dilemma game would exhibit intuitive decision-making. We also hypothesized that an experimental manipulation that may prevent intuitive cooperation (in this study, inverting the payoff matrix) would result in more protracted decision-making and thus lower cooperation rates. To examine these hypotheses, we designed an experiment using an eye-tracking device. In one condition, the outcome of mutual cooperation in the one-shot prisoner’s dilemma game was presented in the upper left-hand corner explaining the result of mutual cooperation first, as in many previous studies (control condition). To suppress the function of intuitive cooperation, we also set the inverted payoff matrix condition in which the positions of the outcomes of mutual cooperation and mutual non-cooperation in the payoff matrix were inverted, explaining the result of mutual non-cooperation first. Although our results did not show the expected differences between the two conditions, it was suggested that cooperators’ decision-making time was shorter in the control condition and that cooperators consistently paid more attention to the outcome of mutual cooperation regardless of the conditions. These results are discussed in relation to the intuitive cooperation model and the social exchange heuristic.

DOI： 10.5178/lebs.2023.101

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Frontiers Media SA  

The “Help Mark,” created in Japan, is worn by people who need help in public settings. It is designed to induce help from others for those in need of help because of their hidden disabilities or health conditions. Several attempts have been made to publicize the meaning and implications of this wearable sign through various media. However, it is difficult to assert whether there is sufficient awareness regarding this sign in the Japanese society. The purpose of this study was to examine the type of messages that are more effective in promoting the “Help Mark” system (Study 1). Additionally, based on the data obtained in Study 1, we presented a newly designed poster to promote the “Help Mark” sign and attempted to empirically examine the effect of this poster (Study 2). The results suggest that a message that reflects that the “Help Mark” is for “everyone,” based on future-oriented thinking, is more effective. Furthermore, it was indicated that people who saw the poster containing a message implying that the “Help Mark” is “for everyone” reported increased positive attitudes toward the “Help Mark” system. These results indicate that encouraging future-oriented thinking may lead to positive attitudes regarding the “Help Mark” system.

DOI： 10.3389/fresc.2022.967033

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Frontiers Media SA  

Previous studies on whether punishers are rewarded by reputational gains have yielded conflicting results. Some studies have argued that punitive behaviors potentially result in a positive evaluation, while others have found the opposite. This study aims to clarify the conditions that lead to the positive evaluation of costly punishment. Study 1 utilized one-round and repeated public goods game (PGG) situations and manipulated decision time for participants’ punitive behavior toward the non-cooperative person in the situation. We also asked participants to report their impression evaluations of punitive behavior toward non-cooperative people. Moreover, utilizing the second- and third-party punishment games, Study 2 manipulated the decision time of participants’ punitive behavior toward the self-interested person and asked them to evaluate the punitive behavior. The results showed that those who punished intuitively were not likely to be evaluated positively. However, punishers were rewarded when the decision to punish was made after deliberation or made by those who were not direct victims. These findings extend previous research on the evaluation of punitive behavior and reveal that deliberative punishment is evaluated positively occasionally.

DOI： 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.794953

researchmap

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Springer Science and Business Media LLC  

Abstract

Objective

Researchers have investigated human altruism toward strangers for decades, using economic games such as the dictator game (DG) in their experiments. However, factors that cause the allocating behavior exhibited by those participants willing to be recipients in the DG have not been identified and the psychological mechanism of avoiding decision-making in economic games has not been widely addressed in previous studies. This study aimed to replicate previous findings regarding the number of people who are willing to be assigned the role of recipient and their allocation behavior and to explore why they share more than people who are willing to be dictators.

Results

We demonstrate that there are people willing to be assigned the role of the recipient, rather than the role of the dictator during the dictator game. In addition, we find evidence indicating that people who are willing to be recipients behave more altruistically in the dictator game than those who prefer to be dictators. Based on our results, we argue that willingness to be a recipient, in relation to the psychological unwillingness to assume responsibility and reputational concerns, is a strategic consideration.

DOI： 10.1186/s13104-022-06148-3

researchmap

Other Link： https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13104-022-06148-3/fulltext.html

Publishing type：Research paper (scientific journal)   Publisher：Frontiers Media SA  

In the trolley problem, a well-known moral dilemma, the intuitive process is believed to increase deontological judgments, while deliberative reasoning is thought to promote utilitarian decisions. Therefore, based on the dual-process model, there seems to be an attempt to save several lives at the expense of a few others in a deliberative manner. This study examines the validity of this argument. To this end, we manipulate decision-making time in the standard trolley dilemma to compare differences among 119 Japanese female undergraduates under three conditions: intuitive judgment, deliberative judgment, and judgment after a group discussion. The current results demonstrate that utilitarian judgments decreased from 52.9% in the intuition condition to 43.7% in the deliberation condition and 37.0% after the discussion. Additional analysis suggests that the decrease in utilitarian judgments may be related to psychological unwillingness to assume responsibility for the lives of others rather than to an increase in deontological judgments. Finally, these results are discussed from an adaptationist perspective.

DOI： 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.795732

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap

researchmap