Altruism Behavior among Male and Female - Essay Example

INVESTIGATION OF ALTRUISM BEHAVIOR AMONG MALE AND FEMALE Introduction Background Altruism is defined as the phenomenon in which an individual promotes the wellbeing of someone else at the expense of their own benefitInvalid source specified.. Altruism is a term usually studied in the field of psychology. A number of researchers have taken interest in how this particular trait can be brought about within a community or within certain individuals. However over the past few years the term has greatly expanded and has even moved towards the field of financeInvalid source specified.. A great deal of works has been conducted regarding altruism and its relation to finance. Eckel and Grossman (1998) in their study have addressed the same issues. Another prominent study conducted by Fehr and Gatcher (2000) in which they further relate financial altruism to various factors. Research Aim The current research work explores the altruism behavior within the context of behavioral finance and can be considered as an attempt to add to the literature that is already present on the topic. The study would also try to achieve some research objectives and answer research questions that have been listed below. Research Questions Based on the research aim, following research questions have been answered in this study: Can we identify altruistic decisions? Can we identify gender effects in relationship to altruistic decisions? When are altruistic decisions more likely to occur in relationship to trading? Can we identify fairness effects in your decision making? Research Objectives Following are the research objectives which are to be obtained by conducting this study: To identify altruistic decisions To identify gender effects in relationship to altruistic decisions To determine when altruistic decisions are most likely to occur when it comes to trading relationship. To identify if there are fairness effects in decision making. Literature Review The authors Eckel & Grossman (1998) clearly illustrated the difference in economic decisions between men and women. A number of studies were conducted in the past regarding similar subject matter. These studies were not only conducted for the field of economics but also psychology to assess the difference in approach between men and women. However, these studies were not able to draw the factors that create distinction between behavior behind economic decisions in both the genders because they did not know about gender being selfish or not. It can be well-stated that conclusions regarding the chosen subject cannot be achieved until or unless the behavior is easily gauged in a general environment. This indicates that the previous studies were unable to demonstrate differences other than experimental environment. Therefore, Eckel & Grossman (1998) introduced double-anonymous dictator game experiment to collect data to find the core difference of behavior of men and women while undertaking economic decisions (Eckel and Grossman 1998). The authors of the study undertook testing of the hypothesis that exclaimed no difference between men and women and then the donations were taken under consideration. It was noted that men donated $0.82 on average while the amount was $1.60 among women. The statistical observation marked that p-value was less than 0.01. It is due to this reason that null hypothesis was rejected by further implying median test of the hypothesis (Eckel and Grossman 1998). The research was able to conclude that women are more selfless in comparison to men. Furthermore, it was also marked that women donate or send out charity double the times of men. The focus of the research was to assess the difference between their economic decisions in order to formulate thesis for further research work. The authors have suggested that a number of studies could be undertaken to find out the factors that might impact the decision making process of both within the context of economic influence (Eckel and Grossman 1998). Another research entitled ‘Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity’ conducted by Fehr and Gachter (2000) states that people are more likely to react or behave differently depending upon their self-interest. Herein, reciprocity is defines as an action of a person to be nicer if he or she is approached by a friendly action of another person. This can also be applied in an otherwise situation i.e. if a person becomes unfair then the other person is also predicted to come up with a brutal and inappropriate action (Fehr and Gachter 2000). Therefore, the authors Fehr and Gachter (2000) regarded reciprocity as positive and negative in the study. A condition has been taken into consideration by the authors where people who are self-interested and those who are reciprocal, meet each other. Both the categories are more likely to dominant depending upon the conditions. This mainly suggests that fairness or retaliation can occur depending upon positive and negative nature of reciprocity. The authors have taken the example of people who exchange gifts with each other that creates a correlation between the parties. The gift amount can differ in an increasing manner because it tends to happen when relationship between two companies are built upon trust instead of quantity (Fehr and Gachter 2000). Research Methodology A quantitative research method has been used to carry out this study. The information used for quantitative analysis has been obtained from primary research. The primary research conducted by the researcher includes the conduct of an experiment in which participants, which included both male and female, were required to trade contracts at the same time and then after doing so share some of their profits to their neighbors. After that they were free to trade again with their neighbors and to share profit and losses with them. Thus the sequence followed by the participants during the experiment was Trade, Swap, Trade and Swap. For the purpose of analysing the data collected, the researcher made use of statistical software, SPSS. Through statistical analysis, the researcher has conducted cross tabulation of the information acquired from experiment to understand how participants, both male and female, have shown altruistic behaviour towards sharing profit and losses of their neighbours. As far as the methodology adopted for this study, the researcher has faced certain limitations which pertain to the nature of information obtained from primary research. The nature of information collected through primary research did not permit the researcher to carry out extensive statistical analysis and put forward findings which could have resulted in a better understanding of the subject matter at hand. Findings and Discussion In this section of the report, findings from statistical analysis of information gathered through primary research have been presented. Demographics A total of 58 participants took part in the experiment, amongst which trading sheets of 47 respondents were considered complete, whereas the remaining were kept out of the analysis due to incomplete information provided. Amongst the 47 participants finalized, 30 were female whereas the remaining 17 were male participants. Gender Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Female 30 63.8 63.8 63.8 Male 17 36.2 36.2 100.0 Total 47 100.0 100.0   Following is a graphical illustration of the gender of participants: After going through the initial trading activities, 28 participants showed losses in both trades, 16 indicated profits, whereas the remaining 3 participants indicated profit in one trade and loss in the other. Profit/Loss in Initial Trading Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid Loss 28 59.6 59.6 59.6 Profit 16 34.0 34.0 93.6 Profit/Loss 3 6.4 6.4 100.0 Total 47 100.0 100.0   Following is a graphical illustration of the profit/loss reported by participants in the initial trading activities: Findings from Cross Tabulation Analysis Findings obtained from cross tabulation of responses are presented as follows: Majority of male and female participants reported loss in their initial trading activities, i.e. 18 out of 30 female participants and 10 out of 17 male participants reported loss. Profit/Loss in Initial Trading * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Female Male Profit/Loss in Initial Trading Loss 18 10 28 Profit 10 6 16 Profit/Loss 2 1 3 Total 30 17 47 On the other hand, neighbors of 22 out of 30 female participants suffered losses, whereas for male, 11 out of 17 participants had their neighbors who suffered losses. Neighbour Loss / Profit * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Female Male Neighbour Loss / Profit Loss 22 11 33 Profit 8 6 14 Total 30 17 47 As far as the decision to ask for sharing losses indicate that 33 percent of female respondents asked their neighbors to share their losses, and a same percentage offered sharing of losses. On the other hand, this percentage for both cases remained low in male participants’ case, which imply that female participants showed a more selfless behavior than male participants. Apart from this, 33 percent of female respondents abstained from offering or asking for sharing profits/losses with their neighbors, whereas this percentage was higher for male participants, i.e. more than 41 percent. Decision * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Female Male Decision Asked 10 7 17 Neither Asked nor Offered 10 7 17 Offered 10 3 13 Total 30 17 47 Lastly, the fact that how many female and male participants reported profit or loss after they shared their profits/losses with their neighbors is interesting to note. Before asking their neighbors or offering them for a share of profit, 60 percent of female respondents reported loss, whereas 59 percent of male participants reported loss. However, after asking or offering their neighbors, the percentage of loss incurring participants among both male and female increased. Profit/Loss * Gender Cross tabulation Count Gender Total Female Male Profit/Loss Loss 24 13 37 Profit 6 4 10 Total 30 17 47 It is however interesting to note that the increase in loss incurring female participants has been significant higher than the increase in loss incurring male participants. As for instance, in the initial trade, 18 female participants indicated loss, which increased to 24 after swaps were made with their neighbors. This means that 80 percent of female participants suffered losses, i.e. an increase of 20 percent. On the other hand, in the initial trade, 10 male participants indicated loss, which increased to 13 after swaps were made with their neighbors. This means that 76 percent of male participants suffered losses, i.e. an increase of 17 percent. As noted in the literature review section of this report, in their study involving double-anonymous dictator game experiment to collect data to find the core difference of behavior of men and women while undertaking economic decisions, Eckel & Grossman (1998) found that women are more selfless than men, which means that in relation to economic decision making, men tend to be more selfish, whereas women are selfless and portray an alturistic behavior in comparison with their male counterparts. These findings were put different by Fehr & Gachter (2000) in their study, who noted that altruistic behavior with reference to economic and financial decision making among individuals is motivated by the circumstances, self-interests and fairness of the situation. Keeping in view these empirical evidences, it can be stated that the findings obtained in this study are in line with the results concluded by Eckel & Grossman (1998) and Fehr & Gachter (2000). The findings imply that altrusitic decisions can be identified in case of female participants, as a significant percentage of them have shared their own profits with their neighbors and thereby suffered losses, which depcits their altruistic behavior. Conclusion of the Study This study concludes that altruistic behavior is more prevalent among females as compared to their male counterparts. The study indicates that females are more inclined towards taking decisions which are selfless and are aimed at assisting their neighbors. In addition to this, the researcher has found that findings obtained in this study are in accordance with the empirical evidences obtained by Eckel & Grossman (1998) and Fehr & Gachter (2000), which concluded that women are more inclined at basing their economic decisions on selflessness as compared to men. Moreover, as indicated by Fehr & Gachter (2000), individuals tend to bases their economic decisions on the fairness of the circumstances around them, the same has been concluded by the researcher in this study. BIBLIOGRAPHY Eckel, C, and P. Grossman. "Are Women Less Selfish then Men: Evidence from Dictator Experiments." The Economic Journal, 1998: 726-735. Fehr, E, and S. Gachter. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity." Journal of Economic Perspective 14 (2000): 159-81. Read More