The effects of self-construal and mindfulness on the self-serving bias in a Nash demand game

Last registered on June 23, 2023
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
The effects of self-construal and mindfulness on the self-serving bias in a Nash demand game
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0011600
Initial registration date
June 20, 2023

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
June 23, 2023, 5:12 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Daniel Neururer
Affiliation
University of Otago
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Joel Hjelte
PI Affiliation
University of Otago

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2023-06-26
End date
2023-06-28
Keywords
Behavior, Lab
Additional Keywords
self-construal, self-serving bias, mindfulness, Nash demand game
JEL code(s)
C72, C91, D91
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Research on the effects of mindfulness – the awareness that arises from paying attention, on purpose, in the present moment and adopting a deliberately open, non-judgmental and impartial view toward one’s thoughts and feelings – suggests that mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have the potential to increase individual well-being. At the same time, the interpersonal effects of MBIs are less clear. This study investigates whether the effects of a short MBI on the self-serving bias in a variant of the Nash demand game is contingent on the self-construal of individuals. In addition, we investigate if a more independent self-construal according to the Twenty Statements Test is correlated with more selfish behavior in a dictator game.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Hjelte, Joel and Daniel Neururer. 2023. "The effects of self-construal and mindfulness on the self-serving bias in a Nash demand game." AEA RCT Registry. June 23. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.11600-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2023-06-26
Intervention End Date
2023-06-28

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Test empirically the prediction that the effects of a short MBI on the self-serving bias in a variant of the Nash demand game depend on the self-construal of individuals measured with the Twenty Statements Test.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
In addition, the study investigates if a more independent self-construal according to the Twenty Statements Test is correlated with more selfish behavior in a dictator game and a lower self-serving bias in the variant of the Nash demand game in general.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The experiment will be conducted online using Qualtrics and participants will be recruited using Prolific. The experiment consists out of three parts. In the first part, the subjects participate in the Twenty Statements Test (TST) and in a dictator game afterwards. In the dictator game the allocators are endowed with 1 GBP and have to decide how much to transfer to a receiver.

In the second part, half of the subjects are randomised into the mindfulness treatment and the other half into the control treatment. In both treatments the subjects are asked to follow the instructions of an 8 minute audio recording – the content of the recording differs across the two treatments: Subjects in the mindfulness treatment are instructed to follow a guided breathing exercise and subjects in the control treatment are instructed to let their minds wander.

In the third part of the study, the subjects play a variant of the Nash demand game. In this game each subject is matched with another subject who listened to the same audio recording. The subjects have to bargain over 100 lottery tickets where 1 ticket wins. The winning probability is determined by the number of tickets a subjects holds after the bargaining. Before the bargaining starts, each participant is randomly assigned to one of two roles – Role A or Role B. If a participant in Role A wins the lottery he/she gets 5 GBP. If a participant in Role B wins the lottery he/she gets 2.5 GBP. It is always the case that a participant in Role A is matched with a participant in Role B.

The bargaining itself has the following structure:
• both subjects simultaneously (without seeing the claim of the other subject) claim a number of tickets for themselves
• if the sum of both claims is less or equal than 100, each subject gets the number of tickets claimed and this number represents the winning probability in percent
• if the sum of both claims exceeds 100, each subject gets 0 lottery tickets and a compensation of 1 GBP for having no chance to win the lottery

All subjects will receive a fixed payment of 3 GBP for participating in the experiment and a variable payment depending on the decisions in the dictator game and the decisions in the variant of the Nash demand game. These payments are processed via Prolific.

Hypotheses to be tested are (1) does a short mindfulness-based intervention lead to a larger (lower) self-serving bias in a variant of the Nash demand game among subjects with relatively independent (interdependent) self-construals; (2) are relatively independent (interdependent) self-construals correlated with a relatively high (low) self-serving bias in a variant of the Nash demand game in general; and (3) are relatively independent (interdependent) self-construals correlated with relatively low (high) transfers in a dictator game.

Excluded from analysis are data coming from participants who have not fully completed all tasks, failed to answer the control questions correctly or have unreasonably quick response times.


Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
All randomizations are computerized.
Randomization Unit
The randomizations are on individual levels.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
One.
Sample size: planned number of observations
600 participants (observations).
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
300 participants (observations) per treatment.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Otago Human Ethics Committee
IRB Approval Date
2023-01-30
IRB Approval Number
D23/021
Analysis Plan

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials