当前位置: X-MOL 学术Royal Soc. Open Sci. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Reducing variance or helping the poorest? A mouse tracking approach to investigate cognitive bases of inequality aversion in resource allocation
Royal Society Open Science ( IF 3.5 ) Pub Date : 2021-03-17 , DOI: 10.1098/rsos.201159
Atsushi Ueshima 1, 2 , Tatsuya Kameda 1, 3, 4
Affiliation  

Humans dislike unequal allocations. Although often conflated, such ‘inequality-averse’ preferences are separable into two elements: egalitarian concern about the variance and maximin concern about the poorest (maximizing the minimum). Recent research has shown that the maximin concern operates more robustly in allocation decisions than the egalitarian concern. However, the real-time cognitive dynamics of allocation decisions are still unknown. Here, we examined participants' choice behaviour with high temporal resolution using a mouse-tracking technique. Participants made a series of allocation choices for others between two options: a ‘non-Utilitarian option’ with both smaller variance and higher minimum pay-off (but a smaller total) compared with the other ‘Utilitarian option’. Choice data confirmed that participants had strong inequality-averse preferences, and when choosing non-utilitarian allocations, participants' mouse movements prior to choices were more strongly determined by the minimum elements of the non-Utilitarian options than the variance elements. Furthermore, a time-series analysis revealed that this dominance emerged at a very early stage of decision making (around 500 ms after the stimulus onset), suggesting that the maximin concern operated as a strong cognitive anchor almost instantaneously. Our results provide the first temporally fine-scale evidence that people weigh the maximin concern over the egalitarian concern in distributive judgements.



中文翻译:

减少差异或帮助最贫穷的人?一种鼠标跟踪方法来调查资源分配中不平等厌恶的认知基础

人类不喜欢分配不均。尽管经常混为一谈,但这种“不平等不平等”的偏好可分为两个要素:对差异的平均主义关注和对最贫困者的最大化关注(最大化最小值)。最近的研究表明,在分配决策中,最大关注点比平等关注点更有效。但是,分配决策的实时认知动态仍然未知。在这里,我们使用鼠标跟踪技术以高时间分辨率检查了参与者的选择行为。参与者在两个选项之间为其他人做出了一系列分配选择:与另一个“功利性选择”相比,“非功利性选择”具有较小的方差和更高的最小收益(但总数较小)。选择数据证实,参与者具有强烈的不平等偏好,并且在选择非功利主义分配时,参与者在选择之前的鼠标移动更多地是由非功利主义选项的最小元素而不是方差元素决定的。此外,时间序列分析表明,这种优势在决策制定的早期阶段就出现了(在刺激发生后约500毫秒),这表明对最大量的关注几乎是瞬间就成为了强大的认知锚。我们的结果提供了时间上第一个精细的证据,表明人们在分配判断中权衡了对最大利益的关注和对平等的关注。在选择之前,鼠标的移动是由非功利性选项的最小元素比方差元素更强烈地决定的。此外,时间序列分析显示,这种优势在决策制定的非常早期阶段就出现了(在刺激发作后约500毫秒),这表明对马克西姆蛋白的关注几乎是在瞬间成为了强大的认知锚。我们的结果提供了时间上第一个精细的证据,表明人们在分配判断中权衡了对最大利益的关注和对平等的关注。在选择之前,鼠标的移动是由非功利性选项的最小元素比方差元素更强烈地决定的。此外,时间序列分析表明,这种优势在决策制定的早期阶段就出现了(在刺激发生后约500毫秒),这表明对最大量的关注几乎是瞬间就成为了强大的认知锚。我们的结果提供了时间上第一个精细的证据,表明人们在分配判断中权衡了对最大利益的关注和对平等的关注。这表明,对马克西姆蛋白的关注几乎是在瞬间就成为了强大的认知锚。我们的结果提供了时间上第一个精细的证据,表明人们在分配判断中权衡了对最大利益的关注和对平等的关注。这表明,对马克西姆蛋白的关注几乎是在瞬间就成为了强大的认知锚。我们的结果提供了时间上第一个精细的证据,表明人们在分配判断中权衡了对最大利益的关注和对平等的关注。

更新日期:2021-03-17
down
wechat
bug