The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Judging a Book by its Cover: Beauty and Expectations in the Trust Game
Abstract
This research examines one mechanism by which people decide whether to trust strangers. Using a laboratory setting that provides subjects with controlled information about their counterparts, we test whether attractive subjects gain a “beauty premium” in a game involving trust and reciprocity. Attractive trustees are viewed as more trustworthy; they are trusted at higher rates and as a consequence earn more in the first stage of the game. Attractiveness does not guarantee higher earnings, as we find a “beauty penalty” attached to attractive trusters in the second stage of the game. This penalty arises because attractive trusters do not live up to expectations of them on the part of the trustees. Trustees withhold repayment when their expectations are dashed. `This punishment is larger when the disappointing truster is attractive.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History
Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995) · Games and Economic Behavior · doi:10.1006/game.1995.1027 · Cited by 5,548
Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution
Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2004) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226712130.001.0001 · Cited by 2,793
Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390 · Cited by 2,429 · cited 4×
“) Consistent with the meta-analysis by Langlois et al. (2000) we find that subjects are in substantial agreement concerning their evaluations.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialPolitical Trust and Trustworthiness
Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475 · Cited by 2,190
Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109 · Cited by 1,875
Valentine, T., Darling, S., & Donnelly, M. (2004) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196599 · Cited by 147
Cited by
Trust and reputation in the sharing economy: The role of personal photos in Airbnb
Ert, E., Fleischer, A., & Magen, N. (2016) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2016.01.013 · Cited by 1,295
Navigating a social world with robot partners: A quantitative cartography of the Uncanny Valley
Mathur, M. B., & Reichling, D. B. (2016) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2015.09.008 · Cited by 439
The politics of interpersonal trust and reciprocity: An experimental approach
Carlin, R. E., & Love, G. J. (2013) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-011-9181-x · Cited by 132
Piling On: Multilevel Government and the Fiscal Common‐Pool
Berry, C. (2008) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00344.x · Cited by 128
More than friends: Popularity on Facebook and its role in impression formation
Scott, G. G. (2014) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/jcc4.12067 · Cited by 66
Bente, G., Dratsch, T., Kaspar, K., Häßler, T., Bungard, O., & Al-Issa, A. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098297 · Cited by 54
“Because attractiveness and trustworthiness are strongly associated [43], we only selected Arab and German avatars with moderately positive to moderately negative attractiveness ratings in order to avoid ceiling and floor effects in the final stimulus set.”
BackgroundIntegration of social and utilitarian factors in decision making.
Averbeck, B. B., & Duchaine, B. (2009) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0016509 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, R. K., & Eckel, C. C.
- Venue
- Political Research Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-06
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 189-202
- ISSN
- 1065-9129 (ISSN-L)
- 1938-274X
- OpenAlex
- W3125732352
- Cited by
- 393
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 25.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
