One interesting thing about the Machiguenga is the explanation that they give for their allocations—it’s not that they don’t care about fairness; it’s that they think that since the players’ roles were selected at random, the game is already fair. Schelling makes a related point: it matters what we call the roles in games, because that affects how people will play. If we called the game “lottery” instead of “ultimatum”, then WEIRD subjects might well be inclined to share less.
My father was also confused when he read that people would reject low offers. After all, it was never their money in the first place, so why should someone think they have any right to get more of it?
One interesting thing about the Machiguenga is the explanation that they give for their allocations—it’s not that they don’t care about fairness; it’s that they think that since the players’ roles were selected at random, the game is already fair. Schelling makes a related point: it matters what we call the roles in games, because that affects how people will play. If we called the game “lottery” instead of “ultimatum”, then WEIRD subjects might well be inclined to share less.
My father was also confused when he read that people would reject low offers. After all, it was never their money in the first place, so why should someone think they have any right to get more of it?