Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Social Decision Making in Adolescents and Young Adults

Evidence From the Ultimatum Game and Cognitive Biases

Bibliographic Data

ID13675970
AuthorsAntonella Marchetti (0000-0001-9985-0539, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), Francesca Baglio (0000-0002-6145-5274, Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation, Scientific Institute and University, IRCCS, Italy), Ilaria Castelli (0000-0003-0271-9628, Dipartimento di Scienze Umane e Sociali, Università degli Studi di Bergamo, Italy; Research Unit on Theory of Mind, Department of Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milano, Italy, corresponding author), Ludovica Griffanti (0000-0002-0540-9353, Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK), Raffaello Nemni (Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation, Scientific Institute and University, IRCCS, Italy; Department of Physiopathology and Transplants, University of Milano, Italy), Federica Rossetto (0000-0001-6336-2648, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), Annalisa Valle (0000-0002-9852-6785, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), Michela Zanette (0000-0002-6096-1896, Don Carlo Gnocchi Foundation, Scientific Institute and University, IRCCS, Italy), Davide Massaro (0000-0002-4511-6897, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore)
Year2018
Volume122
Issue1
Pages135-154
Publication date2018-02-05
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePsychological Reports (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-2941 • E-ISSN: 1558-691X
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0033294118755673
PMID29402178
OpenAlexW2789427069
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited50

During adolescence and early adulthood, individuals deal with important developmental changes, especially in the context of complex social interactions. Previous studies demonstrated that those changes have a significant impact on the social decision making process, in terms of a progressive increase of intentionality comprehension of others, of the sensitivity to fairness, and of the impermeability to decisional biases. However, neither adolescents nor adults reach the ideal level of maximization and of rationality of the homo economicus proposed by classical economics theory, thus remaining more close to the model of the "bounded rationality" proposed by cognitive psychology. In the present study, we analyzed two aspects of decision making in 110 participants from early adolescence to young adulthood: the sensitivity to fairness and the permeability to decisional biases (Outcome Bias and Hindsight Bias). To address these questions, we adopted a modified version of the Ultimatum Game task, where participants faced fair, unfair, and hyperfair offers from proposers described as generous, selfish, or neutral. We also administered two behavioral tasks testing the influence of the Outcome Bias and of the Hindsight Bias in the evaluation of the decision. Our behavioral results highlighted that the participants are still partially consequentialist, as the decisional process is influenced by a complex balance between the outcome and the psychological description of the proposer. As regards cognitive biases, the Outcome Bias and the Hindsight Bias are present in the whole sample, with no relevant age differences

Cognition · Cognitive bias · Cognitive psychology · Developmental psychology · Psychiatry · Social decision making · Ultimatum game · Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social Psychology

  • Omission Bias in Adolescence

    Open Access•Yanwei Wang, Jiaxuan Zhao et al.•Journal of Adolescence•2025

  • Self-Serving Dishonesty Partially Substitutes Fairness in Motivating Cooperation When People Are Treated Fairly

    Open Access•Dandan Li, Ofir Turel et al.•International Journal of…•2022

  • When Does "Economic Man" Dominate Social Behavior?

    Open Access•Colin F Camerer, Ernst Fehr•Science•2006

  • Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games

    Open Access•Elizabeth Hoffman, Kevin McCabe et al.•Games and Economic Behavior•1994

  • Understanding adolescence as a period of social–affective engagement and goal flexibility

    Open Access•Eveline A Crone, Ronald E Dahl•Nature Reviews Neuroscience•2012

  • The nature of human altruism

    Open Access•Ernst Fehr, Urs Fischbacher•Nature•2003

  • The developmental roots of fairness: infants’ reactions to equal and unequal distributions of resources

    Open Access•Alessandra Geraci, Luca Surian•Developmental Science•2011

  • Do Infants Have a Sense of Fairness?

    Open Access•Stephanie Sloane, Renée Baillargeon et al.•Psychological Science•2012

  • Hindsight Bias

    Open Access•Neal J Roese, Kathleen D Vohs•Perspectives on Psychological…•2012

  • Risk and Rationality in Adolescent Decision Making

    Open Access•Valerie F Reyna, Frank H Farley et al.•Psychological Science in the…•2006

  • Hindsight is not equal to foresight

    Baruch Fischhoff•Journal of Experimental…•1975

  • The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game

    Open Access•Alan G Sanfey, J K Rilling et al.•Science•2003

  • Maturity of judgment in adolescence

    Laurence Steinberg, Elizabeth Cauffman•Law and Human Behavior•1996

  • An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining

    Open Access•Werner Güth, Rolf Schmittberger et al.•Journal of Economic Behavior &…•1982

  • Egalitarianism in young children

    Open Access•Ernst Fehr, Helen Bernhard et al.•Nature•2008

  • Adolescent risk taking, impulsivity, and brain development

    Open Access•Daniel Romer•Developmental Psychobiology•2010

  • G*Power 3

    Open Access•Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder et al.•Behavior Research Methods•2007

  • Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History

    Open Access•Joyce E Berg, Joyce Berg et al.•Games and Economic Behavior•1995

  • Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics

    Matthew Rabin•Advances in Behavioral Economics•2011

  • Behaving as expected

    Open Access•Cristina Bicchieri, Alex Chavez et al.•Journal of Behavioral Decision…•2009

  • Outcomes versus intentions

    Open Access•Matthias Sutter•Journal of Economic Psychology•2007

  • Expectations and outcome

    Open Access•Antonella Marchetti, Ilaria Castelli et al.•Journal of Economic Psychology•2011

  • A multiprocess account of hindsight bias in children

    Rüdiger Pohl, Rüdiger F Pohl et al.•Developmental Psychology•2010

  • Outcome bias in decision evaluation

    Jonathan Baron, John C Hershey•Journal of Personality and Social…•1988

  • A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation

    Ernst Fehr, Kari M Schmidt•The Quarterly Journal of Economics•1999

Unique citing works2
Citations per year0,5
Citation span2022 - 2025 (4)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 2

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae