Stage 2 Registered Report: How responsibility attributions to self and others relate to outcome ownership in group decisions.

Matt Jaquiery,Marwa El Zein

doi:10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17504.1

Abstract

Background: Responsibility judgements have important consequences in human society. Previous research focused on how someone's responsibility determines the outcome they deserve, for example, whether they are rewarded or punished. Here, in a pre-registered study (Stage 1 Registered Report: https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16480.2), we investigate the opposite link: How outcome ownership influences responsibility attributions in a social context. Methods: In an online study, participants in a group of three perform a majority vote decision-making task between gambles that can lead to a reward or no reward.Only one group member receives the outcome and participants evaluate their and the other players' responsibility for the obtained outcome. Results: We found that outcome ownership increases responsibility attributions even when the control over an outcome is similar.Moreover, ownership had an effect on the valence bias: participants' higher responsibility attributions for positive vs negative outcomes was stronger for players who received the outcome. Finally, this effect was more pronounced when people rated their own responsibility as compared to when they were rating another's player responsibility. Conclusions: The findings of this study reveal how credit attributions can be biased toward particular individuals who receive outcomes as a result of collective work, both when people judge their own and someone else's responsibility.

Highlights

How we judge people’s responsibility for the outcomes of their actions has important consequences in our society
The obtained results (Figure 3) were consistent with our predictions (Figure 1): we found that a group member receiving the outcome of a group decision is judged more responsible than other group members who contributed to the decision but did not receive the outcome
We found a valence bias with higher responsibility rating for positive vs negative outcomes that was increased by ownership, and even more so when the participants were rating their own as compared to another group member’s responsibility

Summary

Introduction

How we judge people’s responsibility for the outcomes of their actions has important consequences in our society. People tend to attribute higher responsibility to themselves for positive as compared to negative outcomes. Ownership had an effect on the valence bias: participants’ higher responsibility attributions for positive vs negative outcomes was stronger for players who received the outcome. This effect was more pronounced when people rated their own responsibility as compared to when they were rating another’s player responsibility. Conclusions: The findings of this study reveal how credit attributions can be biased toward particular individuals who receive outcomes as a result of collective work, both when people judge their own and someone else’s responsibility

Objectives

Results

Conclusion