Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Mind
-
How to Enjoy Your Decision
5/22/13 -
Inside the Mind of a Psychopath
5/14/13
[Musical introduction.]
Ah to sleep on it, the classic delay tactic. Recent research out of Maastricht University School of Business and Economics shows that indeed delaying a choice, in general, can help us make better decisions.
Researchers presented subjects with an ultimatum game, where player A offers a portion of 10 dollars to player B. If B accepts the offer, both parties get the suggested amounts. And if B refuses, both parties receive nothing. Low offers (say two dollars) are almost always rejected, even though one dollar is better than none.
They paired up 168 subjects and found that responders who made a decision immediately after receiving a one-dollar offer always rejected it. But acceptances skyrocketed to 75 percent for those players who took 10 minutes to fill out a questionnaire after receiving the lowball offer.
Brain imaging studies show that low offers activate the anterior insula, an area associated with feelings of disgust or anger. So the authors note that the delay allows us to chill out and accept the most logical and best option even if we're dealing with cheapskate partner.
—Christie Nicholson
See what we're tweeting about
16 Comments
Add CommentThe anterior insula is correct to register disgust or anger in this situation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAccepting the one dollar is affirming the bad behavior of the bully/antisocial person on the other side of the trade.
If you take the one dollar, you are in need of some assertiveness training.
if the game is played for one round only and i accept the dollar, then i may be submissive, but also one dollar richer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisif iterated, then you have the opportunity to teach the bully a lesson. perhaps next time you will be offered five dollars.
although not explicit in the article i guess this game was played for one round, in which case your "reject" strategy brings to mind the phrase "to cut off your nose to spite your face," which to me seems passive/aggressive rather than assertive.
either way, the research suggests that where possible it pays to reflect upon your impending decisions, accepting or rejecting your insula response (perhaps perceived as a "gut feeling") in the context of longer term goals and rewards.
if the game is played for one round only and i accept the dollar, then i may be submissive, but also one dollar richer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisif iterated, then you have the opportunity to teach the bully a lesson. perhaps next time you will be offered five dollars.
although not explicit in the article i guess this game was played for one round, in which case your "reject" strategy brings to mind the phrase "to cut off your nose to spite your face," which to me seems passive/aggressive rather than assertive.
either way, the research suggests that where possible it pays to reflect upon your impending decisions, accepting or rejecting your insula response (perhaps perceived as a "gut feeling") in the context of longer term goals and rewards.
Why is the player offering money to another a "bully" and "antisocial" ?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy is accepting a dollar lacking in assertiveness?
Is making sure that no one receives anything somehow positive?
As we grow as a species I hope we continue to recognize knee-jerk reactions for what they are and learn to react with more thought and purpose.
Accepting an offer of a dollar is sensible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDeclining the offer to keep the other from getting more is absurd.
Knee - jerk reactions usually come from primitive instincts. As we grow as a species I hope we learn to react with more thought and purpose.
I think JohnSciNew makes a valid point. We are social animals. The complexity of our culture is largely built on our evolved ability to feel the larger social implications of an individual's behavior. There's an important balance between the recipients personal gain and their evolved sense of fairness that serves the larger group. On the curve of fairness vs. personal gain there's a point where humans, and some primates, will shirk the reward to protest a behavior that obviously does not serve the group if it is perpetuated. The human notion of ethics and social justice is not possible without this sense of feeling indignation when an individual acts in a way that challenges collective behavior.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBased on this, the $1 to $2 offer is clearly the more antisocial behavior. Accepting the very low offer rewards this misanthropic behavior in two main ways:
1) The deal maker receives the majority of the money having not earned it in any way.
2) The recipient further reinforces by condoning the behavior in action.
Evolution "knows" what it is doing.
As HS96DLW suspected, the respondents are in fact told ahead of time that they will only be participating for a single round.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe authors of this study also point out that some other studies have come to the opposite conclusion as them: that DLPFC activation doesn't limit a natural impulse to punish unfairness, but instead limits a natural impulse to take what one can get.
This experiment hints at but does not definitively establish which is the underlying impulse and which is the limitation on it.
I've said it before and will probably say it many times again. Read the ORIGINAL source before you go picking apart a short, casually-written magazine article.
"Let me sleep on it: Delay reduces rejection rates in Ultimatum Games" by Veronika Grimm
http://edocs.ub.unimaas.nl/loader/file.asp?id=1491
I was thinking whether to comment on this entry or not. But impulsiveness guided me. Probably if I had slept on the decision I would have avoided typing a completely meaningless blob?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe main problem with this article is the assumption by the experimenters that they know the right answer. They think that the only value in this situation is the money. They seem to forget that other issues brought up here such as self respect and status also have a value, often far more than the few dollars at issue in the game played. I am not entirely convinced that the emotional/intuitive answer people get right away is necessarily the wrong one.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was originally sucked into reading this article by the subheading that seemed to promise insight into, and proof of the virtues of a decision making technique "--relax and cool off--so logical thinking can guide us to the best choice."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI agree that letting some time pass, before finalizing a decision can be a helpful and effective tool in the decision making process - especially for important and complicated decisions.
Unfortunately, the experiment being reported on does not include a complicated decision and is very superficial and artificial.
As the original authors say, there are differing opinions on the way to interpret the results of the experiment. There is very little difference in outcomes, for the delayed responses versus the instant responses. So, it is not at all clear, as the article claims, that "the most logical and best option" is chosen after a delay.
Now I have reacted to this article twice. Once, quickly, with my disgust and anger guiding me. Later, after a more careful reading of the article, the comments and the source material.
I think both of my reactions to the article are reasonable.
I'm disappointed that the insight and proof promised by the subheading did not materialize in the body of the article.
John
P.S. wolfkiss, thank you for explaining, so well, the intent of my quick reaction comments.
wether to comment on it ? let me sleep on it
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Let me sleep on it, baby baby, let me sleep on it. Let me sleep on it, I'll give you my answer in the morning."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMeatloaf.
I wonder what would happen if $1,000,000 were on the table and you were only offered $100,000? I think the insult of 10% would be tempered by the absolute value of several year's income.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wish some very rich science buff would test this hypothesis across multiple trials and I would like to volunteer as either subject.
Hermit
I found this article kinda pointless but hell I would take the dollar and fill out the questionnaire. Now if i was in a a rush I would choose no because a dollar is not really worth it to me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyes in making a decision always take you time. No matter what it is. Because your decision can either make or break you.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI do agree that taking your time will in the long run make for a better decision for everyone. If you rush anything it causes for disaster and failure in the end. Making decisions in your life is what makes you as a person and a path for your future.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this