信任与互惠中的违约问题

IF 0.6 Q4 ECONOMICS
Games Pub Date : 2023-01-13 DOI:10.3390/g14010008
Yao Zhang, Yushu Zhang, Yan Wu, F. Krueger
{"title":"信任与互惠中的违约问题","authors":"Yao Zhang, Yushu Zhang, Yan Wu, F. Krueger","doi":"10.3390/g14010008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trust and reciprocity promote cooperation and are key elements of a successful social life. This study investigated the framing effects on trust and reciprocity behaviors. Using an iterated one-shot within-subjects design, this study explored how trust and reciprocity decisions changed when the game was framed in terms of a give (i.e., using a standard trust game with a default of no trust) and a take (e.g., using a distrust game with a default of full trust) frame. Participants of both genders first completed the scenario version of the game (Session 1), and then played the roles of trustors (Session 2) and trustees (Session 3) with human and computer-mediated human partners either in the give or take frame. Our results showed increased trust in the give than in the take frame, but only pronounced in direct interaction with human (vs. indirect computer-mediated) partners. Participants also showed higher expectations of return in the give than in the take frame. The actual reciprocity was higher in the give than in the take frame when interacting both with human and computer-mediated human partners. The results contribute to our understanding of the factors that shape trust and reciprocity and emphasize the impact of framing the default.","PeriodicalId":35065,"journal":{"name":"Games","volume":"14 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Default Matters in Trust and Reciprocity\",\"authors\":\"Yao Zhang, Yushu Zhang, Yan Wu, F. Krueger\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/g14010008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Trust and reciprocity promote cooperation and are key elements of a successful social life. This study investigated the framing effects on trust and reciprocity behaviors. Using an iterated one-shot within-subjects design, this study explored how trust and reciprocity decisions changed when the game was framed in terms of a give (i.e., using a standard trust game with a default of no trust) and a take (e.g., using a distrust game with a default of full trust) frame. Participants of both genders first completed the scenario version of the game (Session 1), and then played the roles of trustors (Session 2) and trustees (Session 3) with human and computer-mediated human partners either in the give or take frame. Our results showed increased trust in the give than in the take frame, but only pronounced in direct interaction with human (vs. indirect computer-mediated) partners. Participants also showed higher expectations of return in the give than in the take frame. The actual reciprocity was higher in the give than in the take frame when interacting both with human and computer-mediated human partners. The results contribute to our understanding of the factors that shape trust and reciprocity and emphasize the impact of framing the default.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Games\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Games\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14010008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Games","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/g14010008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

信任和互惠促进合作,是成功的社会生活的关键要素。本研究考察了框架效应对信任和互惠行为的影响。本研究使用迭代的一次受试者内设计,探讨了当游戏按照给予(即使用默认不信任的标准信任游戏)和接受(例如使用默认完全信任的不信任游戏)框架构建时,信任和互惠决策是如何变化的。男女参与者首先完成游戏的场景版本(第1课时),然后在互让或接受的框架中与人类和计算机中介的人类伙伴一起扮演委托人(第2课时)和受托人(第3课时)。我们的研究结果表明,与接受框架相比,给予框架的信任度更高,但仅在与人类(与间接计算机介导的)伙伴的直接互动中表现得更为明显。参与者在给予框架中对回报的期望也高于在接受框架中。当与人类和计算机介导的人类伴侣互动时,在给予框架中的实际互惠性高于在接受框架中的互惠性。研究结果有助于我们理解影响信任和互惠的因素,并强调制定违约框架的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Default Matters in Trust and Reciprocity
Trust and reciprocity promote cooperation and are key elements of a successful social life. This study investigated the framing effects on trust and reciprocity behaviors. Using an iterated one-shot within-subjects design, this study explored how trust and reciprocity decisions changed when the game was framed in terms of a give (i.e., using a standard trust game with a default of no trust) and a take (e.g., using a distrust game with a default of full trust) frame. Participants of both genders first completed the scenario version of the game (Session 1), and then played the roles of trustors (Session 2) and trustees (Session 3) with human and computer-mediated human partners either in the give or take frame. Our results showed increased trust in the give than in the take frame, but only pronounced in direct interaction with human (vs. indirect computer-mediated) partners. Participants also showed higher expectations of return in the give than in the take frame. The actual reciprocity was higher in the give than in the take frame when interacting both with human and computer-mediated human partners. The results contribute to our understanding of the factors that shape trust and reciprocity and emphasize the impact of framing the default.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Games
Games Decision Sciences-Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Games (ISSN 2073-4336) is an international, peer-reviewed, quick-refereeing open access journal (free for readers), which provides an advanced forum for studies related to strategic interaction, game theory and its applications, and decision making. The aim is to provide an interdisciplinary forum for all behavioral sciences and related fields, including economics, psychology, political science, mathematics, computer science, and biology (including animal behavior). To guarantee a rapid refereeing and editorial process, Games follows standard publication practices in the natural sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信