Disappointment aversion and social comparisons in a real-effort competition 2012-2017

We present an experiment to investigate the source of disappointment aversion in a sequential real-effort competition. Specifically, we study the contribution of social comparison effects to the disappointment aversion previously identified in a two-person real-effort competition (Gill & Prowse, 2012). To do this we compare “social” and “asocial” versions of the Gill and Prowse experiment, where the latter treatment removes the scope for social comparisons. If disappointment aversion simply reflects an asymmetric evaluation of losses and gains we would expect it to survive in our asocial treatment. Alternatively, if losing to or winning against another person affects the evaluation of losses/gains, as we
show would be theoretically the case under asymmetric inequality aversion, we would expect treatment differences. We find behavior in social and asocial treatments to be similar, suggesting that social comparisons have little impact in this setting. Unlike in Gill and Prowse we do not find evidence of disappointment aversion.
<p>This network project brings together economists, psychologists, computer and complexity scientists from three leading centres for behavioural social science at Nottingham, Warwick and UEA. This group will lead a research programme with two broad objectives: to develop and test cross-disciplinary models of human behaviour and behaviour change to draw out their implications for the formulation and evaluation of public policy.
Foundational research will focus on three inter-related themes: understanding individual behaviour and behaviour change; understanding social and interactive behaviour; rethinking the foundations of policy analysis.
The project will explore implications of the basic science for policy via a series of applied projects connecting naturally with the three themes. These will include: the determinants of consumer credit behaviour; the formation of social values; strategies for evaluation of policies affecting health and safety.
The research will integrate theoretical perspectives from multiple disciplines and utilise a wide range of complementary methodologies including: theoretical modeling of individuals, groups and complex systems; conceptual analysis; lab and field experiments; analysis of large data sets.
The Network will promote high quality cross-disciplinary research and serve as a policy forum for understanding behaviour and behaviour change.</p>

我们开展了一项实验，旨在探究序贯真实努力竞赛（sequential real-effort competition）中失望厌恶（disappointment aversion）的来源。具体而言，我们研究了社会比较效应（social comparison effects）对两人真实努力竞赛中先前已识别的失望厌恶的贡献（Gill & Prowse, 2012）。为此，我们对比了Gill和Prowse实验的“社会”版本与“非社会”版本——后者处理消除了社会比较的空间。若失望厌恶仅反映对损失与收益的非对称评估，则其应在我们的非社会处理中依然存在；反之，若输给或赢过他人会影响对损失/收益的评估（正如我们所展示的，这在非对称不平等厌恶下是理论上的情形），则我们预期会观察到处理间差异。我们发现社会与非社会处理中的行为相似，表明社会比较在此情境下影响甚微。与Gill和Prowse的研究不同，我们未发现失望厌恶的证据。

该网络项目汇聚了来自诺丁汉大学、华威大学和东英吉利大学三所顶尖行为社会科学中心的经济学家、心理学家、计算机科学家及复杂性科学家。该团队将主导一项研究计划，其两大核心目标为：开发并检验人类行为及行为改变的跨学科模型（cross-disciplinary models），以揭示其对公共政策制定与评估（formulation and evaluation of public policy）的启示；开展基础研究，聚焦三大相互关联的主题：理解个体行为及行为改变、理解社会与互动行为、反思政策分析的基础。项目将通过一系列与三大主题自然衔接的应用项目，探索基础科学对政策的启示，包括：消费者信贷行为的决定因素（determinants of consumer credit behaviour）、社会价值观的形成（formation of social values）、影响健康与安全的政策评估策略（strategies for evaluation of policies affecting health and safety）。研究将整合多学科理论视角，并运用多种互补方法（complementary methodologies），包括：个体、群体及复杂系统的理论建模（theoretical modeling of individuals, groups and complex systems）、概念分析（conceptual analysis）、实验室与田野实验（lab and field experiments）、大数据集分析（analysis of large data sets）。该网络将推动高质量跨学科研究，并作为理解行为及行为改变的政策论坛发挥作用。