Laboratory and field studies have demonstrated that exposure to cues of intentional agents in the form of eyes can increase prosocial behavior. However, previous research mostly used 2-dimensional depictions as experimental stimuli. Thus far no study has examined the influence of the spatial properties of agency cues on this prosocial effect. To investigate the role of dimensionality of agency cues on fairness, 345 participants engaged in a decision-making task in a naturalistic setting. The experimental treatment included a 3-dimensional pseudo-realistic model of a human head and a 2-dimensional picture of the same object. The control stimuli consisted of a real plant and its 2-D image. Our results partly support the findings of previous studies that cues of intentional agents increase prosocial behavior. However, this effect was only found for the 3-D cues, suggesting that dimensionality is a critical variable in triggering these effects in a real-world settings. Our research sheds light on a hitherto unexplored aspect of the effects of environmental cues and their morphological properties on decision-making.

Center for Advanced Hindsight Social Science Research Institute Duke University Durham North Carolina United States of America

Department of Anthropology University of Connecticut Storrs Connecticut United States of America

Departments of Religious Studies and Central American Studies California State University Northridge Northridge California United States of America

Interacting Minds Centre Department of Culture and Society Aarhus University Aarhus Denmark

Interdisciplinary Center for Organizational Architecture Department of Management School of Business and Social Sciences Aarhus University Aarhus Denmark

Laboratory for the Experimental Research of Religion Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Nowak MA, Sigmund K. Evolution of indirect reciprocity by image scoring. Nature. 1998;393: 573–577. 10.1038/31225 PubMed DOI

Panchanathan K, Boyd R. A tale of two defectors: The importance of standing for evolution of indirect reciprocity. J Theor Biol. 2003;224: 115–126. 10.1016/S0022-5193(03)00154-1 PubMed DOI

Boyd R, Richerson PJ, Henrich J. The cultural niche: why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108 Suppl: 10918–25. 10.1073/pnas.1100290108 PubMed DOI PMC

Boyd R, Gintis H, Bowles S, Richerson PJ. The evolution of altruistic punishment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100: 3531–3535. 10.1073/pnas.0630443100 PubMed DOI PMC

Ernest-Jones M, Nettle D, Bateson M. Effects of eye images on everyday cooperative behavior: a field experiment. Evol Hum Behav. Elsevier Inc.; 2011;32: 172–178. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.10.006 DOI

Haley KJ, Fessler DMT. Nobody’s watching? Evol Hum Behav. 2005;26: 245–256. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.01.002 DOI

Bateson M, Nettle D, Roberts G. Cues of being watched enhance cooperation in a real-world setting. Biol Lett. 2006;2: 412–4. 10.1098/rsbl.2006.0509 PubMed DOI PMC

Bargh J. Unconscious impulses and desires impel what we think and do in ways Freud never dreamed of. Sci Am. 2014;30: 34–39.

Bargh JA. Toward The ecology of automaticity : the conditions needed to establishing effects produce automatic processing effects. Am J Psychol. 2010;105: 181–199. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1423027 PubMed

Levy J, Foulsham T, Kingstone a. Monsters are people too. Biol Lett. 2012; 8–11. 10.1098/rsbl.2012.0850 PubMed DOI PMC

Fox N. Social Perception in infants Social Perception in infants. Norwood NJ: Ablex; 1985.

Neudecker S. Eye camouflage and false eyespots: chaetodontid responses to predators. Environ Biol Fishes. 1989;25: 143–157.

Emery NJ. The eyes have it : the neuroethology, function and evolution of social gaze. 2000;24. PubMed

Epley N, Waytz A, Cacioppo JT. On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychol Rev. 2007;114: 864–886. 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864 PubMed DOI

Epley N, Waytz A, Akalis S, Cacioppo JT. When We Need A Human: Motivational Determinants of Anthropomorphism. Soc Cogn. 2008;26: 143–155. 10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.143 DOI

Stevens M. The role of eyespots as anti-predator mechanisms, principally demonstrated in the Lepidoptera. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2005;80: 573–588. 10.1017/S1464793105006810 PubMed DOI

Field T, Fox N. Social perception in infants Social perception in infants. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1985.

Baron-Cohen S. Mindblindness and Mindreading. Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind. 1995. pp. 1–9.

Frith CD, Frith U. Interacting minds-a biological basis. Science (80-). 1999;286: 1692–5. PubMed

Guthrie SE. Religion and Art: A Cognitive and Evolutionary Approach.: 1–26.

Sperber D, Premack D, Premack AJ. Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.

Boyer P. Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought. New York: Harper Collins; 2001.

Gray HM, Gray K, Wegner DM. Dimensions of mind perception. Science. 2007;315: 619 10.1126/science.1134475 PubMed DOI

Waytz A, Gray K, Epley N, Wegner DM. Causes and consequences of mind perception. Trends Cogn Sci. Elsevier Ltd; 2010;14: 383–8. 10.1016/j.tics.2010.05.006 PubMed DOI

Gray K, Young L, Waytz A. Mind Perception Is the Essence of Morality. Psychol Inq. 2012;23: 101–124. 10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387 PubMed DOI PMC

Guglielmo S, Monroe AE, Malle BF. At the Heart of Morality Lies Folk Psychology. Inquiry. 2009;52: 449–466. 10.1080/00201740903302600 DOI

Changeux J-P, Ricœur P. What makes us think? Princeton: Princeton University Press.; 2000.

Lamba S, Mace R. People recognise when they are really anonymous in an economic game. Evol Hum Behav. Elsevier Inc.; 2010;31: 271–278. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.02.002 DOI

Gervais WM. Perceiving Minds and Gods: How Mind Perception Enables, Constrains, and Is Triggered by Belief in Gods. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2013;8: 380–394. 10.1177/1745691613489836 PubMed DOI

Piazza J, Bering JM, Ingram G. “Princess Alice is watching you”: Children’s belief in an invisible person inhibits cheating. J Exp Child Psychol. 2011;109: 311–320. 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.02.003 PubMed DOI

Solomon A. Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of One Against a Unanimous Majority. Psychol Monogr Gen Appl. 1956;70: 1–70. 10.1037/h0093718 DOI

Sparks A, Barclay P. Evolution and Human Behavior Eye images increase generosity, but not for long: the limited effect of a false cue. Evol Hum Behav. 2013;34: 317–322.

Burnham TC, Hare B. Engineering Human Cooperation. Hum Nat. 2007;18: 88–108. 10.1007/s12110-007-9012-2 PubMed DOI

Mifune N, Hashimoto H, Yamagishi T. Altruism toward in-group members as a reputation mechanism. Evol Hum Behav. Elsevier Inc.; 2010;31: 109–117. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.004 DOI

Rigdon M, Ishii K, Watabe M, Kitayama S. Minimal Social Cues in the Dictator Game. J Econ Psychol. 2009; 358–367.

Ekström M. Do watching eyes affect charitable giving? Evidence from a field experiment. Exp Econ. 2011;15: 530–546. 10.1007/s10683-011-9312-6 DOI

Powell KL, Roberts G, Nettle D. Eye Images Increase Charitable Donations: Evidence From an Opportunistic Field Experiment in a Supermarket. Fusani L, editor. Ethology. 2012;118: 1096–1101. 10.1111/eth.12011 DOI

Francey D, Bergmuller R. Images of Eyes Enhance Investments in a Real-Life Public Good. PLoS One. 2012;7: 1–7. 10.1371/Citation PubMed DOI PMC

Bateson M, Callow L, Holmes JR, Maxmillian RRL, Nettle D. Do Images of “Watching Eyes” Induce Behaviour That is More Pro-Social or More Normative? A Field Experiment on Littering. PLoS One. 2013;8. PubMed PMC

Xygalatas D. Effects of religious setting on cooperative behavior : a case study from. Religion Brain Behav. 2012; 1–12.

Ahmed A, Salas O. Religious Context and Prosociality: An Experimental Study from Valparaíso, Chile. J Sci Study Relig. 2013;52: 627–637.

Fehr E, Schmidt, Klaus M. A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation. Q J Econ. 1999;114: 817–868.

Falk A, Fehr E, Fischbacher U. Testing theories of fairness—Intentions matter. Games Econ Behav. 2008;62: 287–303. 10.1016/j.geb.2007.06.001 DOI

Fehr E, Gächter S. Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity. J Econ Perspect. 2000;14: 159–181. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2646924

Rabin M. Incorporating Fairness into Game theory and Economics. Am Econ Rev. 1993;83: 1281–1302.

Fathi M, Bateson M, Nettle D. Effects of Watching Eyes and Norm Cues on Charitable Giving in a Surreptitious Behavioral Experiment. Evol Psychol. 2014;12: 878–887. PubMed

Tane K, Takezawa M. Perception of Human Face Does Not Induce Cooperation in Darkness. 2011;2: 24–27. 10.5178/lebs.2011.15 DOI

Raihani J. N, R. B. No A positive effect of flowers rather than eye images in a large-scale, cross-cultural dictator game. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2012; PubMed PMC

Nettle D, Harper Z, Kidson A, Stone R, Penton-Voak IS, Bateson M. The watching eyes effect in the Dictator Game: it’s not how much you give, it's being seen to give something. Evol Hum Behav. Elsevier Inc.; 2013;34: 35–40. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.08.004 DOI

Nettle D, Cronin K a, Bateson M. Responses of chimpanzees to cues of conspecific observation. Anim Behav. 2013;86: 595–602. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.06.015 PubMed DOI PMC

Fehr E, Schneider F. Eyes are on us, but nobody cares: are eye cues relevant for strong reciprocity? Proc Biol Sci. 2010;277: 1315–1323. 10.1098/rspb.2009.1900 PubMed DOI PMC

Kay AC, Wheeler SC, Bargh JA, Ross L. Material priming: The influence of mundane physical objects on situational construal and competitive behavioral choice. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2004;95: 83–96. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.06.003 DOI

Bargh JA. What have we been priming all these years? On the development, mechanisms, and ecology of nonconscious social behavior. Eur J Soc Peychology. 2006;36: 147–168. 10.1002/ejsp.336 PubMed DOI PMC

Tory Higgins E, Rholes WS, Jones CR. Category accessibility and impression formation. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1977;13: 141–154. 10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3 DOI

Baldwin MW, Carrell SE, Lopez DF. Priming relationship schemas: My advisor and the pope are watching me from the back of my mind. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1990;26: 435–454. 10.1016/0022-1031(90)90068-W DOI

Wheeler SC, DeMarree KG. Multiple Mechanisms of Prime-to-Behavior Effects. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2009;3: 566–581. 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00187.x DOI

Bargh JA, Gollwitzer PM, Lee-Chai A, Barndollar K, Trötschel R. The automated will: nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001;81: 1014–1027. 10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1014 PubMed DOI PMC

Aarts H, Dijksterhuis A, Custers R. Automatic Normative Behavior In Environments: The Moderating Role Of Conformity In Activating Situational Norms. Soc Cogn. 2003;21: 447–464. 10.1521/soco.21.6.447.28687 DOI

Aarts H, Dijksterhuis A. The silence of the library: Environment, situational norm, and social behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84: 18–28. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.18 PubMed DOI

Noë A. Experience and experiment Art. J Conscious Stud. 2000;7: 123–136.

Replicating and extending the effects of auditory religious cues on dishonest behavior

Cross-cultural dataset for the evolution of religion and morality project

Music As a Sacred Cue? Effects of Religious Music on Moral Behavior