The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Zero-Sum Bias: Perceived Competition Despite Unlimited Resources
Open accessAbstract
Zero-sum bias describes intuitively judging a situation to be zero-sum (i.e., resources gained by one party are matched by corresponding losses to another party) when it is actually non-zero-sum. The experimental participants were students at a university where students' grades are determined by how the quality of their work compares to a predetermined standard of quality rather than to the quality of the work produced by other students. This creates a non-zero-sum situation in which high grades are an unlimited resource. In three experiments, participants were shown the grade distribution after a majority of the students in a course had completed an assigned presentation, and asked to predict the grade of the next presenter. When many high grades had already been given, there was a corresponding increase in low grade predictions. This suggests a zero-sum bias, in which people perceive a competition for a limited resource despite unlimited resource availability. Interestingly, when many low grades had already been given, there was not a corresponding increase in high grade predictions. This suggests that a zero-sum heuristic is only applied in response to the allocation of desirable resources. A plausible explanation for the findings is that a zero-sum heuristic evolved as a cognitive adaptation to enable successful intra-group competition for limited resources. Implications for understanding inter-group interaction are also discussed.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“People often default to thinking that someone else's gain-especially someone from a competing group-necessitates a loss to themselves, and vice versa 166,167 .”
From Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response (2020) · cites this paper as [167]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. (1994) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741 · Cited by 4,872
Theory of Games and Economic Behavior
Hawkins, D. (1945) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/286866 · Cited by 3,970
Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. J. (1982) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477.002 · Cited by 3,699
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
Bottom, W. P., Gilovich, T. D., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. J. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/20159081 · Cited by 3,584
In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis.
Brewer, M. B. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.307 · Cited by 3,411
Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination
Tajfel, H. (1970) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1170-96 · Cited by 2,577
Intergroup Conflict And Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment
Sherif, M. (2013) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,344
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Esses V. M. Hodson G. Dovidio J. F. (2003). “Public attitudes towards immigrants and immigration: determinants and policy implications,” in Canadian Immigration Policy for the 21st Century, eds Beach C. M. Green A. G. Reitz J. G. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press), 507– 535
- Gigerenzer G. Todd P. M. the ABC Research Group (1999). Simple Heuristics that Make us Smart (New York: Oxford University Press).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–113 of 113
Building and comparing values from different sources
Garcia, B. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/ee161594z13f1z47c7z99b3zf21f5415b5ca
Zhu, N., Chang, L., & Chen, B. (2026) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2026.113829
Can't wait for future gains: The impact of zero-sum mindset on temporal discounting
Zhu, X., Zuo, S., & Zhang, S. (2026) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2026.113832
Jauernig, J., Philipp, C., Pies, I., & Uhl, M. (2026) · Journal of Business Economics · doi:10.1007/s11573-026-01269-8
Burgstaller, L., & Florack, A. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.7002141
Dhir, S., Singh, L. B., & Srivastava, S. (2026) · Journal of the Knowledge Economy · doi:10.1007/s13132-026-03432-6
Coase Lecture—Perceptions, mindsets and beliefs shaping policy views
Stantcheva, S. (2026) · Economica · doi:10.1111/ecca.70069
Which rescue to the rescue? Disentangling demographic, evolutionary, and genetic rescue.
Christie, M. R., Fitzpatrick, S. W., & Searle, C. (2026) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2026.08.010
The Convergence of Zero‐Sum Thinking and Illiberalism in the United States
Morrier, J., Magistro, B., & Alvarez, R. M. (2026) · Social Science Quarterly · doi:10.1111/ssqu.70194
The Role of Social Mobility Experience in Zero‐Sum Beliefs
Liu, K. J., & Stutzer, A. (2026) · Review of Income and Wealth · doi:10.1111/roiw.70094
Economic experiences and positive-sum beliefs
Becchetti, L., Semplici, L., & Salustri, F. (2026) · Eurasian economic review : · doi:10.1007/s40822-026-00400-y
Metadata
- Authors
- Meegan, D. V.
- Affiliations
- University of Guelph (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Meegan, Daniel V.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Psychology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2010
- Volume
- 1
- Pages
- 191-191
- ISSN
- 1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3153800
- OpenAlex
- W2030747588
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Keywords
- perceived competition, grade prediction, grade distribution, cognitive adaptation, intergroup interaction, resource allocation, social cognition
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