1. Lestin, Y. H. Lee, Winton, W. T. Au, & Fion, W. K. Law The Chinese University of Hong Kong Aug 2009 13 th ICSD @ Kyoto

2. Two universal factors 1. Warmth, honest, etc, termed as morality aspect 2. Clever, skillful, etc, termed as competence aspect Similar with might vs morality distinction Assumption – The two aspects summarize the types of information in social dilemma

3. Morality vs Competence Which factor is more influential? From impression formation research Morality importance hypothesis (Bruin & Van Lange, 2000) Morality > Competence

4. Morality vs Competence Goal dependent (Wojciszke, 1998) – Morality related goal or impression formation Morality more influential – Competence related goal Competence more influential Is social dilemma a morality-related or competence- related context?

5. Aim of the current research To compare the importance of morality and competence information in member selection under social dilemma context

6. 303 participants 14-26 players 10 course scenario games Project vs Examination Time as resource 69 Group Project (Cooperation) Individual Examination (Defection) 12 Method – experimental setup

7. 2 Tasks – Form group – Allocate time Anonymity 2 information Resource Cooperation Rate Number of hours available (Resource represent competence) 6 9 12 Average allocation ratio (Cooperation Rate represent morality) 0 – 100%

8. H H H: 9 hrs. H: (38%) H: 9 hrs. (38%) No infoResources infoCooperation infoBoth info 120 seconds to select members

9. DV - popularity Popularity = 50% Popularity = 100%

10. Key findings Prediction of popularity when both information displayed

11. IQ: 200 IQ: 100 Criminal history No criminal history IQ: 200 IQ: 100 Gender: Male Gender: Female

12. Effect of Cooperation Rate in CR only and Both condition

13. Effect of Resource in Res Only and Both Condition

15. Concern 1 Resource x Cooperation Rate = expected resource allocation Single combinatory effect or 2 separate effect? Regression show that the interaction term of resource x cooperation rate was n.s. t(2556) = -.12, p =.91

16. Concern 2 Resource and Cooperate rate measured in different scale Resource: discrete, 6, 9 12 Cooperation Rate: continuous, 0-100% Cooperation Rate not manipulated Alternative explanation

17. Concern 2 A follow-up to eliminate this alternative Same scenario Only member selection The target to be selected are artificial targets Resource and Cooperation Rate Measure in same scale (0-100) Counterbalanced and manipulated

19. Concern 2 Counterbalance by Mirrored target Resource = 30 hr, Cooperation Rate = 60% Resource = 60 hr, Cooperation Rate = 30% Mirrored targets with more resource was selected more frequently than targets with higher cooperation rate Preferred target# of participants Higher Resource37 Higher Cooperation Rate13 No Preference4

20. Concern 3 Maybe our scenario is special! We collected impression rating using the second paradigm (artificial targets)

21. Popularity

22. Conclusion Competence More influential in member selection Less affected by the existence of Morality information The effect is Not due to the combinatory nature of cooperation rate and resource Not because we used different scale Not because our scenario is special

23. Conclusion Competence affect people’s decision stronger than morality information in selecting member under social dilemma situation