IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v37y2013icp65-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

You can’t be better than me: The role of the reference point in modulating people’s pursuit of wealth

Author

Listed:
  • Pittarello, Andrea
  • Rubaltelli, Enrico
  • Rumiati, Rino

Abstract

Two experiments showed that participants use the achievements of others as reference points with which to compare their wealth. In turn, being better or worse than referent others exerted influence on participants’ tendency to interpret ambiguous scenarios in a self favorable way. Experiment 1 revealed that participants who scored consistently below the average performance were more likely than participants who scored consistently above the average to exploit situations in which the rules were unclear. Experiment 2 provided participants with detailed information about their exact ranking within a hypothetical group of several individuals. Results showed that both participants who ranked above (second) and below (second-last) the average were willing to take advantage of ambiguous situations to improve their status. The level of detail of information about participants’ performance allows a more precise evaluations of their achievements and shifts their attention toward the comparison in which they are worse off. Comparisons with relevant others modulate the pursuit of self-interest and greater wealth, and such effect may account for several dynamics in the society.

Suggested Citation

  • Pittarello, Andrea & Rubaltelli, Enrico & Rumiati, Rino, 2013. "You can’t be better than me: The role of the reference point in modulating people’s pursuit of wealth," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 65-76.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:37:y:2013:i:c:p:65-76
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2013.05.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487013000615
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joep.2013.05.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Emmons & Ed Diener, 1985. "Factors predicting satisfaction judgments: A comparative examination," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 157-167, February.
    2. Maurice Schweitzer & Donald Gibson, 2008. "Fairness, Feelings, and Ethical Decision- Making: Consequences of Violating Community Standards of Fairness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 287-301, February.
    3. Schwieren, Christiane & Weichselbaumer, Doris, 2010. "Does competition enhance performance or cheating? A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 241-253, June.
    4. Pommerehne, Werner W & Weck-Hannemann, Hannelore, 1996. "Tax Rates, Tax Administration and Income Tax Evasion in Switzerland," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 88(1-2), pages 161-170, July.
    5. Craig Fox & Daniel Kahneman, 1992. "Correlations, causes and heuristics in surveys of life satisfaction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 221-234, November.
    6. March, James G., 1988. "Variable risk preferences and adaptive aspirations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 5-24, January.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Arvid Hoffmann & Sam Henry & Nikos Kalogeras, 2013. "Aspirations as reference points: an experimental investigation of risk behavior over time," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 193-210, August.
    9. Gino, Francesca & Margolis, Joshua D., 2011. "Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 145-156, July.
    10. Sullivan, Kathryn & Kida, Thomas, 1995. "The Effect of Multiple Reference Points and Prior Gains and Losses on Managers' Risky Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 76-83, October.
    11. Fredrik Carlsson & Olof Johansson‐Stenman & Peter Martinsson, 2007. "Do You Enjoy Having More than Others? Survey Evidence of Positional Goods," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 586-598, November.
    12. Francesca Gino & Lamar Pierce, 2010. "Robin Hood Under the Hood: Wealth-Based Discrimination in Illicit Customer Help," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(6), pages 1176-1194, December.
    13. Crowe, Ellen & Higgins, E. Tory, 1997. "Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations: Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 117-132, February.
    14. Gino, Francesca & Pierce, Lamar, 2009. "The abundance effect: Unethical behavior in the presence of wealth," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 142-155, July.
    15. Mukhtar Ali & H. Cecil & James Knoblett, 2001. "The effects of tax rates and enforcement policies on taxpayer compliance: A study of self-employed taxpayers," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 29(2), pages 186-202, June.
    16. Ran Kivetz & Oleg Urminsky & Yuhuang Zheng, 2006. "The Goal-Gradient Hypothesis Resurrected: Purchase Acceleration, Illusionary Goal Progress, and Customer Retention," Natural Field Experiments 00658, The Field Experiments Website.
    17. Boles, Terry L. & Messick, David M., 1995. "A Reverse Outcome Bias: The Influence of Multiple Reference Points on the Evaluation of Outcomes and Decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 262-275, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Clot, Sophie & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2022. "A reference point bias in judging cheaters," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Benistant, Julien & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2019. "Unethical behavior and group identity in contests," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 128-155.
    3. Necker, Sarah & Paetzel, Fabian, 2023. "The effect of losing and winning on cheating and effort in repeated competitions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Miller, Danny & Pastoriza, David & Plante, Jean-François, 2019. "Conditioning competitive risk: Competitors’ rank proximity and relative ability," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 161-175.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manel Baucells & Martin Weber & Frank Welfens, 2011. "Reference-Point Formation and Updating," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(3), pages 506-519, March.
    2. Amedeo Piolatto & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Prospect theory and tax evasion: a reconsideration of the Yitzhaki puzzle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 543-565, April.
    3. Gino, Francesca & Margolis, Joshua D., 2011. "Bringing ethics into focus: How regulatory focus and risk preferences influence (Un)ethical behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 145-156, July.
    4. Levine, Emma E. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2015. "Prosocial lies: When deception breeds trust," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 88-106.
    5. MatthewD. Rablen, 2008. "Relativity, Rank and the Utility of Income," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(528), pages 801-821, April.
    6. Wei, Ying & Xiong, Sijia & Li, Feng, 2019. "Ordering bias with two reference profits: Exogenous benchmark and minimum requirement," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 229-250.
    7. Bai, Tian & Wu, Meng & Zhu, Stuart X., 2019. "Pricing and ordering by a loss averse newsvendor with reference dependence," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 343-365.
    8. Higgins, E. Tory & Cornwell, James F.M., 2016. "Securing foundations and advancing frontiers: Prevention and promotion effects on judgment & decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 56-67.
    9. Erich Kirchler & Stephan Muehlbacher & Barbara Kastlunger & Ingrid Wahl, 2007. "Why Pay Taxes? A Review of Tax Compliance Decisions," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper0730, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    10. Sergio Da Silva & Raul Matsushita & Vanessa Valcanover & Jessica Campara & Newton Da Costa, 2022. "Losses make choices nonpositional," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(11), pages 1-11, November.
    11. Chen, Yanyan & Mandler, Timo & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2021. "Three decades of research on loyalty programs: A literature review and future research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 179-197.
    12. Zou, Lili Wenli & Chan, Ricky Y.K., 2019. "Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors? An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 113-127.
    13. Brockner, Joel & Higgins, E. Tory, 2001. "Regulatory Focus Theory: Implications for the Study of Emotions at Work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 35-66, September.
    14. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    15. Semjén, András, 2017. "Az adózói magatartás különféle magyarázatai [Various explanations for tax compliance]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 140-184.
    16. Jaakko Aspara & Arvid Hoffmann, 2015. "Selling losers and keeping winners: How (savings) goal dynamics predict a reversal of the disposition effect," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 201-211, June.
    17. Volker Wiemann & Thomas Mellewigt, 1998. "Das Risiko-Rendite Paradoxon. Stand der Forschung und Ergebnisse einer empirischen Untersuchung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 551-572, June.
    18. Mariya Burdina & Scott Hiller, 2021. "When Falling Just Short is a Good Thing: The Effect of Past Performance on Improvement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(7), pages 777-798, October.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:423-439 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. El Harbi, Sana & Bekir, Insaf & Grolleau, Gilles & Sutan, Angela, 2015. "Efficiency, equality, positionality: What do people maximize? Experimental vs. hypothetical evidence from Tunisia," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 77-84.
    21. Steinel, Wolfgang & Valtcheva, Kalina & Gross, Jörg & Celse, Jérémy & Max, Sylvain & Shalvi, Shaul, 2022. "(Dis)honesty in the face of uncertain gains or losses," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Reference point; Goal achievement; Social comparison; Performance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:37:y:2013:i:c:p:65-76. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.