Self-Other Difference In The Tradeoff Between Absolute And Comparative Utilities: From A Misprediction Perspective

The tradeoff between absolute and comparative utilities is one topic that has drawn interest in both psychology and economics.Existing research mainly focuses on the situation when the decision target is oneself,neglecting the situation when the decision target is others.However,both making decisions for oneself and others are common in daily lives.Will individuals exhibit different preferences in the tradeoff between absolute and comparative utilities when making decisions for themselves versus others? Based on the availability hypothesis,people have knowledge of their own internal feelings,whereas they have less access to others' internal feelings,so they tend to judge others' preferences on the basis of others' behaviors.Because others' social-comparison behaviors are more observable and attract more attention than others' behaviors of not making social comparisons,people will mistakenly believe that others value social comparison more than themselves.This belief will make people predict that others value comparative utility more than themselves,and as a result,they will prefer options high in comparative utility for others more than for themselves.Eight experiments were conducted to test this hypothesis.Study 1 tested the self–other differences in the tradeoff between absolute and comparative utilities.In Experiment 1,the participants chose between two conflicting options either for themselves or their friends.One option had high absolute utility but low comparative utility,whereas the other option had low absolute utility but high comparative utility.The results showed that people who made choices for others preferred options with high comparative utility over those with high absolute utility.The logic of Experiment 2 was similar to that of Experiment 1.However,the participants in Experiment 2 made real decisions.The results revealed that the hypothesized self–other differences were replicated and the alternative explanation of an evaluation mode was ruled out.To eliminate social desirability consideration,Experiment 3 was conducted online and the procedure was similar to that of Experiment 2.Again,the effect was replicated.Experiment 4manipulated absolute and comparative utilities orthogonally to identify which utility was influenced by the decision target,and to further rule out the social desirability and the “others are less rational than me” alternative explanations.The results demonstrated that choosing for others increased the importance of comparative utility but did not affect the importance of absolute utility.Study 2 examined whether the self–other differences in the tradeoff between absolute and comparative utilities were driven by a belief that others value comparative utility more than oneself.In Experiment 5,before making decisions,the participants made predictions about their own or others' preferences.In addition,a third condition was included where participants rated the options others chose for them.This condition provided a benchmark to test whether the prediction about others' preferences was accurate.The results showed that people predicted others valued comparative utility more than they did themselves;therefore,they preferred options high in comparative utility for others more than for themselves.Moreover,the results demonstrated that in fact,others did not like options high in comparative utility that much;people overestimated how others valued comparative utility.Study 3 further explored the underlying mechanism of the misprediction.Experiments 6 and 7 investigated the extent to which people believed they and others valued social comparison.Experiment 6 measured the participants' social comparison orientation in terms of performance.Experiment 7 measured the participants' general social comparison orientation.The results of the two experiments both revealed a belief that others valued social comparison more than oneself.Experiments 8 manipulated the availability of others' social-comparison behaviors and behaviors of not making social comparisons,to examine whether this could moderate the misprediction and to rule out the impression management alternative explanation.The results showed that the self–other differences disappeared when others' behaviors of not making social comparisons were made available.This research introduced the variable “I and other” into the research field of absolute and comparative utilities tradeoff,which is helpful to reflect the whole picture of this field.This research shows self–other differences in the tradeoff between absolute and comparative utilities,and reveals the misprediction mechanism that drives this effect.Theoretically,this research helps to extend theories on behavioral decision making and enriches the bounded rationality theory of human decision making.Practically,understating such differences helps people in sales,management,consulting,service,and other industries to make accurate predictions and to make high-quality decisions for others.