From Chris Butterfield
While reading your account of the evolution of kindness in humans (10 November, p 42) it struck me that the “ultimatum game” might not simply reflect altruism.
In this psychology experiment, player A suggests how to split a pot of money with player B, and if B agrees, they both keep their share. But if I was player A, I probably wouldn’t think “how much should I give?” but “how much will B let me keep?”
So the game is also about how fair we think others expect us to be, and their likely enforcement of that ideal. I would assume that B would penalise me for not giving a “fair” amount and act accordingly.
When the amount is low, it’s no surprise player A gives away an average of 45 per cent. However, if you were to up the stakes I think you would see a different answer. If you gave me £10 million to split, would B really give up an offer of £2 million because they thought it was unfair?
Advertisement
Gloucester, UK
