Wherefore art thou competitors? How situational affordances help differentiate among prosociality, individualism, and competition

  • Yi Liu
  • , Adam W. Stivers
  • , Ryan O. Murphy
  • , Niels J. Van Doesum
  • , Jeff Joireman
  • , Marcello Gallucci
  • , Efrat Aharonov-Majar
  • , Ursula Athenstaedt
  • , Liying Bai
  • , Robert Böhm
  • , Nancy R. Buchan
  • , Xiao-Ping Chen
  • , Kitty B. Dumont
  • , Jan B. Engelmann
  • , Kimmo Eriksson
  • , Hyun Euh
  • , Susann Fiedler
  • , Justin Friesen
  • , Simon Gachter
  • , Camilo Garcia
  • Roberto Gonzalez, Sylvie Graf, Katarzyna Growiec, Martina Hrebickova, Gokhan Karagonlar, Toko Kiyonari, Yu Kou, D. Michael Kuhlman, Siugmin Lay, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Norman P. Li, Yang Li, Boris Maciejovsky, Zoi Manesi, Ali Mashuri, Aurelia Mok, Karin S. Moser, Adrian Netedu, Chandrasekhar Pammi, Michael J. Platow, Christopher P. Reinders Folmer, Cecilia Reyna, Claudia Simao, Sonja Utz, Leander van der Meij, Sven Waldzus, Yiwen Wang, Bernd Weber, Ori Weisel, Tim Wildschut, Fabian Winter, Junhui Wu, Jose C. Yong, Paul A. M. Van Lange

Publications: Contribution to journalArticlePeer Reviewed

Abstract

The Triple Dominance Measure (choosing between prosocial, individualistic, and competitive options) and the Slider Measure (“sliding” between various orientations, for example, from individualistic to prosocial) are two widely used techniques to measure social value orientation, that is, the weight individuals assign to own and others’ outcomes in interdependent situations. Surprisingly, there is only moderate correspondence between these measures, but it is unclear why and what the implications are for identifying individual differences in social value orientation. Using a dataset of 8021 participants from 31 countries and regions, this study revealed that the Slider Measure identified fewer competitors than the Triple Dominance Measure, accounting for approximately one-third of the non-correspondence between the two measures. This is (partially) because many of the Slider items do not afford a competitive option. In items where competition is combined with individualism, competitors tended to make the same choices as individualists. Futhermore, we demonstrated the uniqueness of competitors. Compared to prosocials and individualists, competitors exhibited lower levels of both social mindfulness and trust. Overall, the present work highlights the importance of situational affordances in measuring personality, the benefits of distinguishing between individualists and competitors, and the importance of utilizing a measure that distinguishes between these two proself orientations.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages22
JournalEuropean Journal of Personality
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2024

Funding

Research was supported in part by Grant 022.003.040 from the Dutch Research Council (NWO) awarded to P.A.M.-V.L. The contribution of Y. Liu is supported by China Scholarship Council (20180636274). The contribution of M.H. and S. Graf was supported by Grant 23-06170S from the Czech Science Foundation and by Rozvoj Vyzkumne<acute accent> Organizace (Development of a Research Organization) RVO 68081740 from the Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences. The contribution of R.G. was supported by ANID/FONDAL 15130009 from the Centre for Social Conflict and Cohesion Studies and ANID/FONDAP 15110006 from the Center for Intercultural and Indigenous Research. The contribution of G.J.L. was supported by Standard Research Grant 410-2010-1221 from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The contribution of O.W. was supported by ERC-AdG295707 Cooperation from the European Research Council. The contributions of S. Gachter was supported by ERC-AdG 295707 COOPERATION and ERC-AdG 101020453 PRINCIPLES from the European Research Council.

Austrian Fields of Science 2012

  • 501021 Social psychology

Keywords

  • Competitors
  • Measurement
  • Situational affordances
  • Social value orientation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Wherefore art thou competitors? How situational affordances help differentiate among prosociality, individualism, and competition'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this