Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27826282›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016

When Do Low Status Individuals Accept Less? The Interaction between Self- and Other-Status during Resource Distribution.

Philip R Blue, Jie Hu, Xueying Wang, Eric van Dijk, Xiaolin Zhou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Philip R BlueCenter for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China.
Jie HuCenter for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China.
Xueying WangCenter for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China.
Eric van DijkDepartment of Social and Organizational Psychology, Leiden UniversityLeiden, Netherlands; Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden UniversityLeiden, Netherlands.
Xiaolin ZhouCenter for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; Key Laboratory of Machine Perception (Ministry of Education), Peking UniversityBeijing, China; Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking UniversityBeijing, China; PKU-IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Peking UniversityBeijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In real-world social interactions, social status influences responses to resource distribution. However, the way in which one's own social status interacts with another's status to influence responses to resource distribution is far from clear. In the current study, we dynamically manipulated participants' social status and then asked participants to act as recipients in the ultimatum game (UG) along with proposers whose social status was made known to the participants. Experiment 1 used a between-participants design in which the participants were assigned as being of either high or low status according to their performance in a math competition (i.e., rank-inducing task). In Experiment 2, social status was manipulated within-subjects using the same rank-inducing task, with rounds of UG interleaved between rank-inducing sessions. Findings from the two experiments showed that both self-status and other-status influenced responses to UG offers, as participants were more likely to accept low offers from high status than low status proposers; this effect was particularly robust for low status participants when compared with high status participants. These findings suggest that, in comparison with individuals in high status, individuals in low status are more willing to accept low offers during resource distribution and are more affected by other-status considerations.

Indexed as

acceptancefairnesssocial hierarchysocial statusultimatum game

Identifiers

PMID27826282
PMCPMC5078797

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.