Abstract
Dual-process models of altruistic choice assume that automatic responses give way to deliberation over time, and are a popular way to conceptualize how people make generous choices and why those choices might change under time pressure. However, these models have led to conflicting interpretations of behaviour and underlying psychological dynamics. Here, we propose that flexible, goal-directed deployment of attention towards information priorities provides a more parsimonious account of altruistic choice dynamics. We demonstrate that time pressure tends to produce early gaze-biases towards a person’s own outcomes, and that individual differences in this bias explain how individuals’ generosity changes under time pressure. Our gaze-informed drift-diffusion model incorporating moment-to-moment eye-gaze further reveals that underlying social preferences both drive attention, and interact with it to shape generosity under time pressure. These findings help explain existing inconsistencies in the field by emphasizing the role of dynamic attention-allocation during altruistic choice.
Highlights
Dual-process models of altruistic choice assume that automatic responses give way to deliberation over time, and are a popular way to conceptualize how people make generous choices and why those choices might change under time pressure
To identify underlying preferences independent of attention’s effect on choice, and determine how those preferences might shape eye-gaze, we developed an extension of attentional drift-diffusion models (ADDMs)[30,34,35] to simultaneously incorporate and account for real-time eye-movements during choice
We developed an eight-parameter gaze-informed multi-attribute extension of the attentional drift-diffusion model (ADDM)[30,35]
Summary
Individuals’ average wother negatively predicted tendencies to shift gaze priorities towards $Self under time pressure (b = −7.312, SE = 3.136, t47 = −2.332, p < 0.05, semipartial R2 = 0.104), even when controlling for average wself (b = 5.273, SE = 3.907, t47 = 1.350, p = 0.18, semi-partial R2 = 0.037) Together these results support our model of prioritised attention: individuals’ early attention tracks their dispositional social preferences, especially under time pressure. We confirmed a causal effect of attention on choice independent of social preferences: generosity was strongly influenced by whether participants were forced to fixate on $Self or $Other first, but only under time pressure (interaction: b = 0.664, SE = 0.184, z = 3.601, p < 0.001; simple effect of firstfixation under high time pressure: b = −0.833, SE = 0.144, z = −5.766, p < 0.001; low time pressure: b = −0.169, SE = 0.117, z = −1.444, p = 0.149, Fig. 7b). Even when holding dispositional social preferences constant, directing participants’ attention towards their own or others’ outcomes made them more selfish or more generous, respectively
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
