his.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Is there a pro-self component behind the prominence effect?: Individual resource allocation decisions with communities as potential beneficiaries
University of Skövde, School of Technology and Society.
Department of Strategy and Management, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Breiviksveien 40, N-5045 Bergen, Norway.
2005 (English)In: International Journal of Psychology, ISSN 0020-7594, E-ISSN 1464-066X, Vol. 40, no 6, 429-440 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

An important problem for decision-makers in society deals with the efficient and equitable allocation of scarce resources to individuals and groups. The significance of this problem is rapidly growing since there is a rising demand for scarce resources all over the world. Such resource dilemmas belong to a conceptually broader class of situations known as social dilemmas. In this type of dilemma, individual choices that appear "rational" often result in suboptimal group outcomes. In this article we study how people make monetary allocation decisions between the community where they live and a neighbouring community, with the aim of finding out to what extent these decisions are subject to biased over-weighting. The manuscript reports four experiments that deal with the way individuals make such allocation decisions when the potential beneficiaries are such communities. The specific goal of these experiments is to gauge the amount of bias in the weights that people assign to the various beneficiaries. Taken together, the results from all the four experiments suggest that making the gain of the neighbouring community prominent to a higher extent de-biases the outcomes (the prominence effect) compared to when own community gain is made prominent. Place identity is discussed as a potentially important factor in this connection. Hence, it may be argued that there seems to be some kind of a pro-self component that is able to explain a large part of the variance observed for the prominence effect. Connections between such a factor and in-group favouritism are discussed. A strength of the study was that these major results appeared to be quite robust when considered as task effects, as the salience of the manipulated context factors in the studies (in terms of reliable main or interaction effects) did not distort them.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Psychology Press, 2005. Vol. 40, no 6, 429-440 p.
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Humanities and Social sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:his:diva-1745DOI: 10.1080/00207590544000103ISI: 000233967100007Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-33744981184OAI: oai:DiVA.org:his-1745DiVA: diva2:32021
Available from: 2007-08-27 Created: 2007-08-27 Last updated: 2013-04-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Eek, Daniel
By organisation
School of Technology and Society
In the same journal
International Journal of Psychology
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 34 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf