Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42339242›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cognition2025

Effects of maximum and minimum offers on reciprocity and trust perceptions during economic decision-making.

Margaret M Doheny, Nelson A Roque, Nichole R Lighthall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cognition, 2025. 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

3 authors.

Margaret M DohenyDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States.
Nelson A RoqueDepartment of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University (PSU), University Park, PA, United States.
Nichole R LighthallDepartment of Psychology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Although it is understood that previous betrayals affect future trust decisions, the degree to which this is true remains unclear in terms of frequency and severity. Additionally, it is currently unknown whether this relationship between the frequency and magnitude of received actions and subsequent trust decisions is mirrored when individuals experience acts of generosity. Prospect theory proposes that losses are weighed more heavily than gains, but the comparison between frequent, minor losses or gains and infrequent major losses or gains has yet to be explored. Methods: The current study (n = 123) utilizes an adapted version of an economic trust game to examine the effects of minimum and maximum offerings on both reciprocations and perceptions of trust. Participants played the game with two partners: one who offered a maximum or minimum offer (extreme) and one who did not (stable), in either a high or low offer condition where all offers from the stable partner were above or below the median amount, respectively. Results: The results align with prospect theory in that minimum offers had a greater impact on both behavior and perceptions than equivalent gains (maximum offers). Discussion: This study highlights complexities between trust, reciprocity, and perceptions of fairness, with implications for understanding social behavior in real-world settings.

Indexed as

decision-makingeconomic gamefairnessreciprocitytrust game

Identifiers

PMID42339242
PMCPMC13281041

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.