↓ Skip to main content

When Do Low Status Individuals Accept Less? The Interaction between Self- and Other-Status during Resource Distribution

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
When Do Low Status Individuals Accept Less? The Interaction between Self- and Other-Status during Resource Distribution
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01667
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip R. Blue, Jie Hu, Xueying Wang, Eric van Dijk, Xiaolin Zhou

Abstract

In real-world social interactions, social status influences responses to resource distribution. However, the way in which one's own social status interacts with another's status to influence responses to resource distribution is far from clear. In the current study, we dynamically manipulated participants' social status and then asked participants to act as recipients in the ultimatum game (UG) along with proposers whose social status was made known to the participants. Experiment 1 used a between-participants design in which the participants were assigned as being of either high or low status according to their performance in a math competition (i.e., rank-inducing task). In Experiment 2, social status was manipulated within-subjects using the same rank-inducing task, with rounds of UG interleaved between rank-inducing sessions. Findings from the two experiments showed that both self-status and other-status influenced responses to UG offers, as participants were more likely to accept low offers from high status than low status proposers; this effect was particularly robust for low status participants when compared with high status participants. These findings suggest that, in comparison with individuals in high status, individuals in low status are more willing to accept low offers during resource distribution and are more affected by other-status considerations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Austria 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Student > Master 8 16%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 14 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 35%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,475,157
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,316
of 30,015 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,288
of 313,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#371
of 459 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,015 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 459 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.