IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gue/guelph/2020-07.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

You Cannot Judge a Book by Its Cover: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment on Recognizing Generosity from Facial Information

Author

Listed:
  • Ninghua Du

    (School of Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, Shanghai, China)

  • Fei Song

    (Ted Rogers School of Management, Ryerson University, Toronto ON Canada)

  • C. Bram Cadsby

    (Department of Economics and Finance, University of Guelph, Guelph ON Canada)

Abstract

People form first impressions of others and make judgments about their social traits and character on the basis of facial perceptions. We implement a controlled laboratory experiment to investigate whether people can glean information about another person's other-regarding preferences from photographs of their face. To do so, we conduct a dictator game with an allocator and a recipient, and then present pairs of allocator photos to observers. Each pair portrays one relatively generous allocator and another who has demonstrated less generosity. The experimental results show that the observers cannot accurately recognize more generous allocators, but instead make systematic errors. In particular, the observers believe that allocators who are rated as being more attractive by others are more generous, despite there being no actual relationship between physical attractiveness and generosity.

Suggested Citation

  • Ninghua Du & Fei Song & C. Bram Cadsby, 2020. "You Cannot Judge a Book by Its Cover: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment on Recognizing Generosity from Facial Information," Working Papers 2007, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
  • Handle: RePEc:gue:guelph:2020-07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uoguelph.ca/economics/repec/workingpapers/2020/2020-07.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999. "A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 817-868.
    2. Hamermesh, Daniel S. & Parker, Amy, 2005. "Beauty in the classroom: instructors' pulchritude and putative pedagogical productivity," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 369-376, August.
    3. Michèle Belot & V. Bhaskar & Jeroen van de Ven, 2012. "Can Observers Predict Trustworthiness?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(1), pages 246-259, February.
    4. Samuele Centorrino & Elodie Djemaï & Astrid Hopfensitz & Manfred Milinski & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Honest signalling in trust interactions: smiles rated as genuine induce trust and signal higher earnings opportunities," Post-Print hal-01518371, HAL.
    5. Boris van Leeuwen & Charles N. Noussair & Theo Offerman & Sigrid Suetens & Matthijs van Veelen & Jeroen van de Ven, 2018. "Predictably Angry—Facial Cues Provide a Credible Signal of Destructive Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3352-3364, July.
    6. Andreoni, James & Petrie, Ragan, 2008. "Beauty, gender and stereotypes: Evidence from laboratory experiments," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 73-93, February.
    7. Bradley J. Ruffle & Arie Sherman & Zeev Shtudiner, 2020. "Good-Looking Prices," Working Paper series 20-17, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    8. Bolton, Gary E. & Katok, Elena, 1995. "An experimental test for gender differences in beneficent behavior," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 48(3-4), pages 287-292, June.
    9. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 1998. "Are Women Less Selfish Than Men? Evidence from Dictator Experiments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 726-735, May.
    10. Markus M. Mobius & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2006. "Why Beauty Matters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 222-235, March.
    11. Rosenblat, Tanya, 2008. "The Beauty Premium: Physical Attractiveness and Gender in Dictator Games," Staff General Research Papers Archive 13001, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Andreoni, James & Petrie, Ragan, 2004. "Public goods experiments without confidentiality: a glimpse into fund-raising," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1605-1623, July.
    13. Astrid Hopfensitz & Wim de Neys & Jean-François Bonnefon, 2017. "Can We Detect Cooperators by Looking at Their Face?," Post-Print halshs-01698391, HAL.
    14. Jaeger, Bastian & Sleegers, Willem W.A. & Evans, Anthony M. & Stel, Mariëlle & van Beest, Ilja, 2019. "The effects of facial attractiveness and trustworthiness in online peer-to-peer markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 75(PA).
    15. Catherine C. Eckel & Ragan Petrie, 2011. "Face Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1497-1513, June.
    16. De Neys, Wim & Hopfensitz, Astrid & Bonnefon, Jean-François, 2015. "Adolescents gradually improve at detecting trustworthiness from the facial features of unknown adults," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 17-22.
    17. Qingguo Ma & Yue Hu, 2015. "Beauty Matters: Social Preferences in a Three-Person Ultimatum Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    18. Billur Aksoy & Catherine C. Eckel & Rick K. Wilson, 2018. "Can I Rely on You?," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, October.
    19. C. Cadsby & Maroš Servátka & Fei Song, 2010. "Gender and generosity: does degree of anonymity or group gender composition matter?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(3), pages 299-308, September.
    20. Axel Ockenfels & Gary E. Bolton, 2000. "ERC: A Theory of Equity, Reciprocity, and Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 166-193, March.
    21. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13933 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Adriana Samper & Linyun W Yang & Michelle E Daniels & Eileen FischerEditor & Leonard LeeAssociate Editor, 2018. "Beauty, Effort, and Misrepresentation: How Beauty Work Affects Judgments of Moral Character and Consumer Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 126-147.
    23. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    24. Hoffman, Elizabeth & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon L, 1996. "Social Distance and Other-Regarding Behavior in Dictator Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 653-660, June.
    25. Solnick, Sara J. & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 1999. "The Influence of Physical Attractiveness and Gender on Ultimatum Game Decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 199-215, September.
    26. James Andreoni & John Miller, 2002. "Giving According to GARP: An Experimental Test of the Consistency of Preferences for Altruism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 737-753, 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. Zeyang Chen & Yu-Jane Liu & Juanjuan Meng & Zeng Wang, 2023. "What’s in a Face? An Experiment on Facial Information and Loan-Approval Decision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2263-2283, April.

    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. Balafoutas, Loukas & Fornwagner, Helena & Grosskopf, Brit, 2023. "Predictably competitive? What faces can tell us about competitive behavior," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 931-940.
    2. Rudolf Vetschera & Guenther Kainz, 2013. "Do Self-Reported Strategies Match Actual Behavior in a Social Preference Experiment?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 823-849, September.
    3. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2021. "Nonverbal content and trust: An experiment on digital communication," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1517-1532, October.
    4. Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah, 2010. "Is the veil of ignorance only a concept about risk? An experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 1062-1066, December.
    5. Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Joo Young Jeon & Bibhas Saha, 2017. "Gender Differences in the Giving and Taking Variants of the Dictator Game," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(2), pages 474-483, October.
    6. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3r19808hvq8dlb97k36cbcqihj is not listed on IDEAS
    7. François Cochard & Alexandre Flage & Gilles Grolleau & Angela Sutan, 2020. "Are individuals more generous in loss contexts?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(4), pages 845-866, December.
    8. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Beauty perks: Physical appearance, earnings, and fringe benefits," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    9. Zakaria Babutsidze & Nobuyuki Hanaki & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2020. "Nonverbal content and swift trust: An experiment on digital communication," Working Papers 2008, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    10. Catherine C. Eckel & Ragan Petrie, 2011. "Face Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1497-1513, June.
    11. Linda Kamas & Anne Preston, 2012. "Gender and Social Preferences in the US: An Experimental Study," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 135-160, January.
    12. Alevy, Jonathan E. & Jeffries, Francis L. & Lu, Yonggang, 2014. "Gender- and frame-specific audience effects in dictator games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 50-54.
    13. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3r19808hvq8dlb97k36cbcqihj is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    15. Zylbersztejn, Adam & Babutsidze, Zakaria & Hanaki, Nobuyuki, 2020. "Preferences for observable information in a strategic setting: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 268-285.
    16. Gauriot, Romain & Heger, Stephanie A. & Slonim, Robert, 2020. "Altruism or diminishing marginal utility?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 24-48.
    17. Heinz, Matthias & Juranek, Steffen & Rau, Holger A., 2012. "Do women behave more reciprocally than men? Gender differences in real effort dictator games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 105-110.
    18. Thorsten Chmura & Christoph Engel & Markus Englerth, 2013. "Selfishness As a Potential Cause of Crime. A Prison Experiment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    19. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    20. Boschini, Anne & Muren, Astri & Persson, Mats, 2012. "Constructing gender differences in the economics lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 741-752.
    21. Tausch, Franziska & Potters, Jan & Riedl, Arno, 2013. "Preferences for redistribution and pensions. What can we learn from experiments?," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 298-325, July.
    22. Póvoa, Angela Cristiane Santos & Pech, Wesley & Viacava, Juan José Camou & Schwartz, Marcos Tadeu, 2020. "Is the beauty premium accessible to all? An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experiment; Dictator Game; Social Preference; Other-regarding Preferences; Generosity; Appearance.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gue:guelph:2020-07. 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: Stephen Kosempel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/degueca.html .

    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.