Abstract

Humans are tremendously sensitive to unfairness. Unfairness provokes strong negative emotional reactions and influences our subsequent decision making. These decisions might not only have consequences for ourselves and the person who treated us unfairly but can even transmit to innocent third persons – a phenomenon that has been referred to as generalized negative reciprocity. In this study we aimed to investigate whether regulation of emotions can interrupt this chain of unfairness. Real allocations in a dictator game were used to create unfair situations. Three different regulation strategies, namely writing a message to the dictator who made an unfair offer, either forwarded or not forwarded, describing a neutral picture and a control condition in which subjects just had to wait for three minutes, were then tested on their ability to influence the elicited emotions. Subsequently participants were asked to allocate money between themselves and a third person. We show that writing a message which is forwarded to the unfair actor is an effective emotion regulation strategy and that those participants who regulated their emotions successfully by writing a message made higher allocations to a third person. Thus, using message writing as an emotion regulation strategy can interrupt the chain of unfairness.

Highlights

  • Across cultures humans have a strong preference for fairness1,2

  • Since we were interested in the effect of emotion regulation in unfair situations we focused only on the unfair allocations in the analysis

  • Planned contrasts revealed that message writing with forwarding significantly increased happiness ratings compared to the control condition (t = 4.95, p = 0.01, 95% C.I. [1.21, 8.68], Cohens’d = 2.62)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Across cultures humans have a strong preference for fairness. Violations of fairness provoke negative emotional responses. Reappraisal has been shown to decrease rejection rates in the ultimatum game13,14 In these studies emotions in the ultimatum game were either not measured explicitly or did not change after regulation. Messages consist of several components besides emotion expression, for example writing in general, additional content elements and forwarding of the message. Which of these components drive the effect of altered rejection rates remains unclear. Emotion regulation strategies were shown to decrease direct negative reciprocity in the ultimatum game. The following questions remain open: 1) Does message writing as an emotion regulation strategy effectively alter negative emotions due to unfair social situations? 2) Does an effective emotion regulation strategy decrease general negative reciprocity www.nature.com/scientificreports/. Since unfairness is a hazard for social interactions answering the second question will contribute in improving the quality of those

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call