Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.

In the context of economic games, adults sacrifice money to avoid unequal outcomes, showing so-called inequity aversion. Child-friendly adaptations of these games have shown that children, too, show inequity aversion. Moreover, inequity aversion shows a clear developmental trajectory, with young chi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Katherine McAuliffe, Natalie Benjamin, Felix Warneken
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2022-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272710
_version_ 1828114330329022464
author Katherine McAuliffe
Natalie Benjamin
Felix Warneken
author_facet Katherine McAuliffe
Natalie Benjamin
Felix Warneken
author_sort Katherine McAuliffe
collection DOAJ
description In the context of economic games, adults sacrifice money to avoid unequal outcomes, showing so-called inequity aversion. Child-friendly adaptations of these games have shown that children, too, show inequity aversion. Moreover, inequity aversion shows a clear developmental trajectory, with young children rejecting only disadvantageously unequal distributions and older children rejecting both disadvantageously and advantageously unequal distributions. However, based on existing work, it is difficult to compare adult and child responses to inequity because (1) adapting economic games to make them child-friendly may importantly alter the dynamics of the fairness interaction and (2) adult work typically uses abstract rewards such as money while work with children typically uses more concrete rewards like candy, stickers or toys. Here we adapted the Inequity Game-a paradigm designed to study children's responses to inequality in isolation from other concerns-to test inequity aversion in adults (N = 104 pairs). We manipulated whether participants made decisions about concrete rewards (candy) or abstract rewards (tokens that could be traded in for money). We found that, like children, adults rejected unequal payoffs in this task. Additionally, we found that reward type mattered: adults rejected disadvantageous-but not advantageous-monetary distributions, yet rejected both disadvantageous and advantageous candy distributions. These findings allow us to draw clearer comparisons across child and adult responses to unfairness and help paint a fuller picture of inequity aversion in humans.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T12:22:59Z
format Article
id doaj.art-d5dbfbddf7db4a6f8ef4b8a7ddac418a
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T12:22:59Z
publishDate 2022-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-d5dbfbddf7db4a6f8ef4b8a7ddac418a2022-12-22T04:24:02ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032022-01-01178e027271010.1371/journal.pone.0272710Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.Katherine McAuliffeNatalie BenjaminFelix WarnekenIn the context of economic games, adults sacrifice money to avoid unequal outcomes, showing so-called inequity aversion. Child-friendly adaptations of these games have shown that children, too, show inequity aversion. Moreover, inequity aversion shows a clear developmental trajectory, with young children rejecting only disadvantageously unequal distributions and older children rejecting both disadvantageously and advantageously unequal distributions. However, based on existing work, it is difficult to compare adult and child responses to inequity because (1) adapting economic games to make them child-friendly may importantly alter the dynamics of the fairness interaction and (2) adult work typically uses abstract rewards such as money while work with children typically uses more concrete rewards like candy, stickers or toys. Here we adapted the Inequity Game-a paradigm designed to study children's responses to inequality in isolation from other concerns-to test inequity aversion in adults (N = 104 pairs). We manipulated whether participants made decisions about concrete rewards (candy) or abstract rewards (tokens that could be traded in for money). We found that, like children, adults rejected unequal payoffs in this task. Additionally, we found that reward type mattered: adults rejected disadvantageous-but not advantageous-monetary distributions, yet rejected both disadvantageous and advantageous candy distributions. These findings allow us to draw clearer comparisons across child and adult responses to unfairness and help paint a fuller picture of inequity aversion in humans.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272710
spellingShingle Katherine McAuliffe
Natalie Benjamin
Felix Warneken
Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
PLoS ONE
title Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
title_full Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
title_fullStr Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
title_full_unstemmed Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
title_short Reward type influences adults' rejections of inequality in a task designed for children.
title_sort reward type influences adults rejections of inequality in a task designed for children
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272710
work_keys_str_mv AT katherinemcauliffe rewardtypeinfluencesadultsrejectionsofinequalityinataskdesignedforchildren
AT nataliebenjamin rewardtypeinfluencesadultsrejectionsofinequalityinataskdesignedforchildren
AT felixwarneken rewardtypeinfluencesadultsrejectionsofinequalityinataskdesignedforchildren