Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41913739›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of personality

Wherefore art thou competitors? How situational affordances help differentiate among prosociality, individualism, and competition.

Yi Liu, Adam W Stivers, Ryan O Murphy, Niels J Van Doesum, Jeff Joireman, Marcello Gallucci, Efrat Aharonov-Majar, Ursula Athenstaedt, Liying Bai, Robert Böhm and 44 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of personality. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

54 authors.

Yi LiuDepartment of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Institute for Brain and Behavior Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6577-4862
Adam W StiversPsychology Department, Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA, USA.
Ryan O MurphyDepartment of Economics, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Niels J Van DoesumSocial, Economic and Organisational Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands.
Jeff JoiremanDepartment of Marketing and International Business, Carson College of Business, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.
Marcello GallucciFaculty of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
Efrat Aharonov-MajarDepartment of Psychology, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben Gurion, Israel.
Ursula AthenstaedtDepartment of Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Liying BaiDepartment of Applied Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, China.
Robert BöhmFaculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Nancy R BuchanSonoco International Business Department, Darla Moore School of Business, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Xiao-Ping ChenDepartment of Management and Organization, Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Kitty B DumontSchool of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
Jan B EngelmannCenter for Research in Experimental Economics and Political Decision Making (CREED), Amsterdam School of Economics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Kimmo ErikssonSchool of Education, Culture and Communication, Mälardalen University, Vasteras, Sweden.
Hyun EuhGies College of Business, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0972-1640
Susann FiedlerDepartment of Strategy & Innovation, Institute of Cognition & Behavior, Vienna University of Economics and Business, Wien, Austria.
Justin FriesenDepartment of Psychology, University of Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Simon GächterCentre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Camilo GarciaLaboratory of Social Interaction, Psychology Department, Universidad Veracruzana, Xalapa, Mexico.
Roberto GonzálezEscuela de Psicología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Sylvie GrafDepartment of Personality and Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic.
Katarzyna GrowiecDepartment of Personality Psychology, Institute of Psychology, SWPS University, Warszawa, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4448-2561
Martina HřebíčkováDepartment of Personality and Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic.
Gokhan KaragonlarDepartment of Business, School of Business, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir, Turkey.
Toko KiyonariSchool of Social Informatics, Aoyama Gakuin University, Shibuya-ku, Japan.
Yu KouInstitute of Developmental Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
D Michael KuhlmanDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA.
Siugmin LayCentro de Medición Mide UC, Escuela de Psicología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Geoffrey J LeonardelliRotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Norman P LiSchool of Social Sciences, Singapore Management University, Singapore.
Yang LiGraduate School of Informatics, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan.
Boris MaciejovskySchool of Business, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
Zoi ManesiDepartment of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Institute for Brain and Behavior Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Ali MashuriDepartment of Psychology, University of Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia.
Aurelia MokDepartment of Management, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Karin S MoserFaculty of Psychology, UniDistance Suisse, Brig, Switzerland.
Adrian NeteduDepartment of Sociology and Social Work, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Iasi, Romania.
Chandrasekhar PammiCentre of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences, University of Allahabad, Allahabad, India.
Michael J PlatowSchool of Medicine and Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Christopher P Reinders FolmerDepartment of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Cecilia ReynaInstituto deInvestigaciones Psicológicas, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Cordoba, Argentina.
Cláudia SimãoCatólica-Lisbon School of Business and Economics, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Sonja UtzEveryday Media Lab, Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien (Knowledge Media Research Center), Tübingen, Germany.
Leander van der MeijDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands.
Sven WaldzusCentro de Investigação e IntervençãoSocial, Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisboa, Portugal.
Yiwen WangInstitute of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou, China.
Bernd WeberInstitute of Experimental Epileptology and Cognition Research, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Ori WeiselDepartment of Public Policy, Faculty of Social Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Tim WildschutCenter for Research on Self and Identity, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Fabian WinterInstitute for Sociology, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.
Junhui WuCAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jose C YongSchool of Social and Health Sciences, James Cook University, Singapore.
Paul A M Van LangeDepartment of Experimental and Applied Psychology, Institute for Brain and Behavior Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7774-6984

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Triple Dominance Measure (choosing between prosocial, individualistic, and competitive options) and the Slider Measure ("sliding" between various orientations, for example, from individualistic to prosocial) are two widely used techniques to measure social value orientation, that is, the weight individuals assign to own and others' outcomes in interdependent situations. Surprisingly, there is only moderate correspondence between these measures, but it is unclear why and what the implications are for identifying individual differences in social value orientation. Using a dataset of 8021 participants from 31 countries and regions, this study revealed that the Slider Measure identified fewer competitors than the Triple Dominance Measure, accounting for approximately one-third of the non-correspondence between the two measures. This is (partially) because many of the Slider items do not afford a competitive option. In items where competition is combined with individualism, competitors tended to make the same choices as individualists. Futhermore, we demonstrated the uniqueness of competitors. Compared to prosocials

Indexed as

competitorsmeasurementsituational affordancessocial value orientation

Identifiers

PMID41913739
PMCPMC13033367

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.