IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v21y1977i2p299-322.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral and Perceptual Differences Between Structurally Equivalent, Two-Person Games

Author

Listed:
  • Jerald W. Young

    (Department of Management University of Florida)

Abstract

This research primarily examines the effects of “naturalness†of context upon (a) game-related trusting behavior, (b) the cognitive predictors of trusting behavior such as the other's trustworthiness and perceived intentions, and (c) subjects“ attributions of causality within the experimental gaming situation itself. Since reward level and trust-worthy first impressions could possibly moderate the effects of context, a 2 × 2 × 2 (rich versus poor context x 83% versus 50% reward level x good versus bad first impression) factorial design was used in which 60 male Yale undergraduates responded to a series of 12 games (n = 40 for the rich; n = 20 for the poor). The †rich“ context was created with 12 verbal communication choice dilemmas. The †poor“ context consisted of 12 numeric outcome games, verified to be structurally equivalent to the verbal games. More trusting behavior was observed in the poor context (83% versus 62%). Negative first impression in the rich context only was a powerful inhibitor of initial, first-trial trusting behavior (5% versus 63%). A rich context produced more overall perceived trustworthiness and less bad intentions. High versus moderate reward and good versus bad first impressions produced more overall trustworthiness and more perceived good and less bad intentions. Subjects in the rich context perceived the experimenter to be biased against competitive subject behavior; subjects in the poor context perceived the experimenter to be biased for cooperative behavior, in particular, and for any activity in general. Additionally, a context by reward interaction indicated that subjects alter their perceptions of the appropriateness of reward/betray responses depending upon the type of context. When the response was appropriate for the context, causality tended to be attributed to the experimenter; when inappropriate, to the hypothetical other with whom the subjects were †interacting.“ The function of role expectations is discussed. Seven problems to monitor or control in future research are derived.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerald W. Young, 1977. "Behavioral and Perceptual Differences Between Structurally Equivalent, Two-Person Games," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(2), pages 299-322, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:21:y:1977:i:2:p:299-322
    DOI: 10.1177/002200277702100205
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002200277702100205
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/002200277702100205?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
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:sae:jocore:v:21:y:1977:i:2:p:299-322. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.