lower defection rate in the PD and to a much lower willingness to make and individualistic food
choice in the restaurant.7
Benjamin, Choi and Strickland (2010) extend the priming technology applied in the
LeBeouf study to show that the Asian prime also renders Asian-American subjects more patient.
In contrast to the LeBoeuf et al. study, in Benjamin et al. subjects’ preferences were elicited in an
incentive-compatible way, lending further credibility to the notion that Asian-American subjects
have multiple identities. LeBeouf et al. also show that the notion of multiple identities is not
restricted to ethnic categories; it is possible to prime a “family-oriented” identity, which triggers
values related to family obligations, or an “occupation-oriented” identity associated with
obligations to one’s firm. Thus, just as the visual frames illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 shape
perception, making an individual’s caste status public or using a simple “background
questionnaire” can render certain identities more salient and induce the subjects to align their
behaviour with the values and commitments associated with that identity.
The examples mentioned above suggest that individuals may have multiple preference
orderings that can be shaped by the social environment and the prevailing institutions. While the
notion that an individual may have multiple preference orderings may sound strange, it is no
more unusual than the notion that one and the same picture can represent two different -
mutually exclusive - animals, as in Figure 3. Very small changes in the visual environment may
have a decisive influence of which animal one can see. If one slightly covers, for example, the
rabbit’s nose in Figure 3, one can see only the duck; if one covers part of the duck’s bill, one can
only see the rabbit. This means that slight changes in the lighting conditions that change the ease
with which the rabbit’s nose or the duck’s bill can be seen will have a decisive influence on
which animal an observer perceives. In the same way, slight changes in the social mindset in
which individuals find themselves as a result of priming one or another aspect of an institution
sounds quite good to you. To your surprise, your friends do not find the special dish as interesting as you do. In fact,
one of them says it sounds ‘‘weird.” This makes you somewhat nervous about the meal, but still, you find it appealing.
The time comes to place your order. What do you think you would do? Order the traditional meal that I always order.
Order the new, special meal, regardless of what my friends say.”
7 The prime’s impact on cooperation behavior could be due to its effect on subjects’ beliefs about others’
cooperation or it could have changed preferences. See also footnote 5. Thus, future research should control for
beliefs, and subjects should be bear real consequences from their choices in a PD game instead of answering a
hypothetical PD question.
10