English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Human children but not chimpanzees make irrational decisions driven by social comparison

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons72749

Herrmann,  Esther       
Minerva Research Group Human Origins of Self-Regulation, Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons185688

Zeidler,  Henriette
Minerva Research Group Human Origins of Self-Regulation, Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Herrmann, E., Haux, L. M., Zeidler, H., & Engelmann, J. M. (2019). Human children but not chimpanzees make irrational decisions driven by social comparison. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: B, Biological Sciences, 286(1894): 20182228. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.2228.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0003-9161-B
Abstract
Human evolutionary success is often argued to be rooted in specialized social skills and motivations that result in more prosocial, rational and cooperative decisions. One manifestation of human ultra-sociality is the tendency to engage in social comparison. While social comparison studies typically focus on cooperative behaviour and emphasize concern for fairness and equality, here we investigate the competitive dimension of social comparison: a preference for getting more than others, expressed in a willingness to maximize relative payoff at the cost of absolute payoff. Chimpanzees and human children (5–6- and 9–10-year-olds) could decide between an option that maximized their absolute payoff (but put their partner at an advantage) and an option that maximized their relative payoff (but decreased their own and their partner's payoff). Results show that, in contrast to chimpanzees and young children, who consistently selected the rational and payoff-maximizing option, older children paid a cost to reduce their partner's payoff to a level below their own. This finding demonstrates that uniquely human social skills and motivations do not necessarily lead to more prosocial, rational and cooperative decision-making.