Poster #80 - Children’s Cognitive Reflection Predicts Fairness in a Dictator Game

• In Event: Poster Session 09

Abstract

There is much debate in the adult literature about whether cooperation arises from more intuitive or more reflective thinking (Rand, 2016; Bouwmeester et al., 2017). Recent research with preschool and school-aged children has continued to provide conflicting results on this question. For example, children tend to act more fairly in a dictator game (i.e., share more resources with an absent partner) when required to respond quickly over slowly (Plötner et al., 2021). However, when time pressure is not manipulated, children with longer response latencies (not shorter) tend to act more fairly (Chajes et al., 2022). The present study examines this intuitive cooperation debate via cognitive reflection (Frederick, 2005), the most widely-used individual difference measure of intuitive vs. reflective thinking in adults. Cognitive reflection predicts adult decision making in economic games (e.g., Corgnet et al., 2015) and children’s intuitive vs. counterintuitive thinking in science and mathematics (Young & Shtulman, 2020). Here we ask whether cognitive reflection predicts children’s fair vs. selfish decision making in a dictator game.

Five- to 12-year-olds (N = 50, study in progress) participated in an online study via Zoom. Children first completed a children’s cognitive reflection test (CRT-D), along with measures of executive functions (i.e., inhibitory control, set shifting, working memory) and nonverbal reasoning (Raven’s Matrices). Children then completed the one-shot dictator game used by Chajes et al. (2022) modified for Zoom (see Figure 1). Following training and comprehension checks, children decided how to share a $1 USD bonus with an absent partner from two options: (fair choice) - 2 quarters for self & 2 quarters for partner; (selfish choice) - 3 quarters for self & 1 quarter for partner. Children were also asked to explain their decision.

A majority of the current sample selected the fair choice (34 of 50 children). The vast majority of children (47 children) provided explanations that referred to fairness norms or desires. A preliminary Bayesian regression analysis that adjusted for children’s age, gender, executive functions, and nonverbal reasoning suggests cognitive reflection has a positive effect on fair decisions (see Figure 2). Children with higher CRT-D scores were more likely to select the fair distribution than children with lower CRT-D scores. Further, cross-validated Bayesian model selection suggests CRT-D score is a more important variable for out-of-sample predictive performance than any other cognitive measure in the study (e.g., inhibitory control).

These current data suggest individual differences in cognitive reflection may predict variation in children’s prosociality in fairness contexts. Once complete, results of this study will further our understanding of whether cooperative choices are underpinned by more intuitive or more reflective mechanisms. Finally, prior research suggests cognitive reflection is a useful predictor of many facets of adult social thinking and behavior. The present study suggests cognitive reflection may be similarly useful when applied to children’s social cognition.

Authors

• Andrew Young, Northeastern Illinois University
  Presenting Author

• Margaret Verne, Northeastern Illinois University

• Bianca Michelle Vives, Northeastern Illinois University

• Samantha Andrea Macksey, Northeastern Illinois University

• Michele Villacres, Northeastern Illinois University

• Ruth Breckinridge Church, Northeastern Illinois University