Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time

Michael I. Norton; Dan  Ariely

Article | Perspectives on Psychological Science | January 2011

Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time

Abstract

Disagreements about the optimal level of wealth inequality underlie policy debates ranging from taxation to welfare. We attempt to insert the desires of "regular" Americans into these debates, by asking a nationally representative online panel to estimate the current distribution of wealth in the United States and to "build a better America" by constructing distributions with their ideal level of inequality. First, respondents dramatically underestimated the current level of wealth inequality. Second, respondents constructed ideal wealth distributions that were far more equitable than even their erroneously low estimates of the actual distribution. Most important from a policy perspective, we observed a surprising level of consensus: All demographic groups—even those not usually associated with wealth redistribution such as Republicans and the wealthy—desired a more equal distribution of wealth than the status quo.

Keywords: Taxation; Policy; Perspective; Wealth; Equality and Inequality; Income; Demography; Debates; Welfare or Wellbeing; Diversity; Philanthropy and Charitable Giving; Public Administration Industry; United States;

Format: Print

4 pages

Find at Harvard Read Now

Citation:

Norton, Michael I., and Dan Ariely. "Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time." Perspectives on Psychological Science 6, no. 1 (January 2011): 9–12.

Four studies reveal the benefits of relationship rituals: couples with relationship rituals report more positive emotions and greater relationship satisfaction and commitment than those without them. We show that rituals are crucial for understanding consumption practices in romantic relationships. Using a sample of romantic dyads, we identify a novel moderating role of mutual agreement, such that both members of a couple must agree that they have a ritual: different couples can see the same consumption behavior (e.g., paying for a weekly date night) as either a ritual or a routine, and the benefits accrue only to those couples who jointly view it as a symbolically meaningful ritual. We contribute to the literature on rituals by empirically documenting the relationships between rituals, specific emotions, and relationship satisfaction, and by demonstrating that the same sequence of actions can have different psychological effects due to the role of mutual agreement. Finally, we contribute to research on consumers’ shared experiences by suggesting a novel mechanism for committing to such experiences: relationship rituals.

Humans are an extremely prosocial species. Compared to most primates, humans provide more assistance to family, friends, and strangers, even when costly. Why do people devote their resources to helping others? In this chapter, we examine whether engaging in prosocial behavior promotes subjective well-being, which encompasses greater positive affect, lower negative affect, and greater life satisfaction. Next, we identify the conditions under which the well-being benefits of prosociality are most likely to emerge. Finally, we briefly highlight several levers that can be used to increase prosocial behavior, thereby potentially increasing well-being.

Article | Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Handshaking Promotes Deal-Making by Signaling Cooperative Intent

Juliana Schroeder, Jane L. Risen, Francesca Gino and Michael I. Norton

We examine how a simple handshake—a gesture that often occurs at the outset of social interactions—can influence deal-making. Because handshakes are social rituals, they are imbued with meaning beyond their physical features. We propose that during mixed-motive interactions, a handshake is viewed as a signal of cooperative intent, increasing people’s cooperative behavior and affecting deal-making outcomes. In Studies 1a and 1b, pairs who chose to shake hands at the onset of integrative negotiations obtained better joint outcomes. Study 2 demonstrates the causal impact of handshaking using experimental methodology. Study 3 suggests one driver of the cooperative consequence of handshaking: negotiators expected partners who shook hands to behave more cooperatively than partners who avoided shaking hands or partners whose nonverbal behavior was unknown; these expectations of cooperative intent increased negotiators’ own cooperation. Study 4 uses an economic game to demonstrate that handshaking increased cooperation even when handshakes were uninstructed (vs. instructed). Further demonstrating the primacy of signaling cooperative intent, handshaking actually reduced cooperation when the action signaled ill intent (e.g., when the handshaker was sick; Study 5). Finally, in Study 6, executives assigned to shake hands before a more antagonistic, distributive negotiation were less likely to lie about self-benefiting information, increasing cooperation even to their own detriment. Together, these studies provide evidence that handshakes, ritualistic behaviors imbued with meaning beyond mere physical contact, signal cooperative intent and promote deal-making.

Keywords: handshake; cooperation; Affiliation; competition; negotiation; Nonverbal Communication; Negotiation Participants; Behavior; Communication Intention and Meaning; Negotiation Deal;

Citation:

Schroeder, Juliana, Jane L. Risen, Francesca Gino, and Michael I. Norton. "Handshaking Promotes Deal-Making by Signaling Cooperative Intent." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 116, no. 5 (May 2019): 743–768. View Details

Cite View Details Find at Harvard Read Now

Faculty & Research

Building a Better America—One Wealth Quintile at a Time

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author