1 / 10

Shefali Garg(11678) Smith Gupta(11720)

Eye images increase generosity, but not for long: the limited effect of a false cue Adam Sparks, Pat Barclay. Shefali Garg(11678) Smith Gupta(11720). Background. Cooperation increases as anonymity decreases.

Olivia
Download Presentation

Shefali Garg(11678) Smith Gupta(11720)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Eye images increase generosity, but not for long: the limited effect of a false cueAdam Sparks, Pat Barclay Shefali Garg(11678) Smith Gupta(11720)

  2. Background • Cooperation increases as anonymity decreases. • Humans have neural circuitry that automatically activates in response to both real and pictured faces. • Human decision-making influenced not only by conscious, reasoned evaluation of explicit knowledge, but also by non-conscious, intuitive judgments based on implicit cues. How long does it last? Does it always work?

  3. Importance • Helps resolve discrepancies about whether and when eye images influence cooperation • People habituate to an uninformative reputation cue • Informs efforts to use reputational cues to promote cooperation in real world or research settings

  4. Experiment: Is the Eyes Effect sensitive to exposure length?

  5. Conclusions • The eyes effect is an involuntary, subconscious response. • Significant effect of exposure length on giving. • More effective if few real observers will be present. • No observed effect on autistic people. • Effect on giving to in-group, not out-group.

  6. References • Barclay, P. (2011b). The evolution of charitable behaviour and the power of reputation. In C. Roberts (Ed.), Applied evolutionary psychology (pp. 149–172). New York: Oxford University Press. • Andreoni, J., & Petrie, R. (2004). Public goods experiments without confidentiality: A glimpse into fund-raising. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1605–1623. • Haley, K. J., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2005). Nobody’s watching? Subtle cues affect generosity in an anonymous economic game. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 26, 245–256, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.01.002. • Blest, A. D. (1957). The function of eyespot patterns in the Lepidoptera. Behaviour, 11, 209–256. • Sparks, A. Subtle cues and economic games. MSc [thesis]. Hamilton (ON): McMaster University; 2010. • Bateson, M., Nettle, D., & Roberts, G. (2006). Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biology Letters, 2, 412–414, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1098/rsbl.2006.0509. • Barclay, P., & Willer, R. (2007). Partner choice creates competitive altruism in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274, 749–753, http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.0209. • DeBruine, L. M. (2002). Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 269, 1307–1312, http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb. 2002.2034. • Mifune, N., Hashimoto, H., & Yamagishi, T. (2010). Altruism toward in-group members as a reputation mechanism. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 109–117, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.004. • Oda, R., Niwa, Y., Honma, A., & Hiraishi, K. (2011). An eye-like painting enhances the expectation of a good reputation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32, 166–171, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.11.002.

  7. Thank You

More Related