Research ArticleSOCIAL SCIENCES

It’s not just how the game is played, it’s whether you win or lose

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  17 Jul 2019:
Vol. 5, no. 7, eaau1156
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aau1156
  • Fig. 1 Proportions of normative beliefs by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Random exchange (RA) involves zero redistribution and is identical in each panel (indicated by 0 on the x axis). Proportions are estimates from Bayesian logistic regression with uninformative priors. Bars are 95% credible intervals with n = 996.

  • Fig. 2 Proportions of cognitive beliefs (luck and talent) by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Random exchange (RA) involves zero redistribution and is identical in each panel (indicated by 0 on the x axis). Proportions are estimates from Bayesian logistic regression with uninformative priors. Bars are 95% credible intervals with n = 996.

  • Fig. 3 Affective responses by exchange condition (PR and RE), level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) and loser (red).

    Random exchange (RA) involves zero redistribution and is identical in each panel (indicated by 0 on the x axis). Proportions are estimates from Bayesian logistic regression with uninformative priors. Bars are 95% credible intervals with n = 996.

Supplementary Materials

  • Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/7/eaau1156/DC1

    Supplementary Text

    Table S1. Sample by outcome, exchange condition, and intensity.

    Table S2. Inequality of opportunity by exchange condition.

    Table S3. Logistic regression on winning the Swap Game.

    Table S4. Proportion of winners by player ID.

    Table S5. Proportion of respondents that evaluate the results of the game as fair.

    Table S6. Proportion of respondents that mention luck/talent/rules as the most important factor to explain the results of the game.

    Table S7. Proportion of respondents that mention positive/negative/indifferent feelings about his/her results in the game.

    Table S8. Sociodemographic characteristics.

    Table S9. Sociodemographic characteristics by exchange condition.

    Fig. S1. Sample instructions for the one-card RE exchange condition.

    Fig. S2. Individual hand strength across all rounds for winners (blue) and losers (red) by

    intensity (columns) and direction (rows) of the exchange condition.

    Fig. S3. Predicted probability of winning the game.

    Fig. S4. Proportions of normative responses by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Fig. S5. Proportions of talent responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Fig. S6. Proportions of luck responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Fig. S7. Proportions of rules of the game responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).

    Fig. S8. Decomposition of the one-card and two-card RA exchange conditions.

    Fig. S9. Proportions of the least important factor by winning status, exchange condition, and intensity of redistribution.

    Reference (37)

  • Supplementary Materials

    This PDF file includes:

    • Supplementary Text
    • Table S1. Sample by outcome, exchange condition, and intensity.
    • Table S2. Inequality of opportunity by exchange condition.
    • Table S3. Logistic regression on winning the Swap Game.
    • Table S4. Proportion of winners by player ID.
    • Table S5. Proportion of respondents that evaluate the results of the game as fair.
    • Table S6. Proportion of respondents that mention luck/talent/rules as the most important factor to explain the results of the game.
    • Table S7. Proportion of respondents that mention positive/negative/indifferent feelings about his/her results in the game.
    • Table S8. Sociodemographic characteristics.
    • Table S9. Sociodemographic characteristics by exchange condition.
    • Fig. S1. Sample instructions for the one-card RE exchange condition.
    • Fig. S2. Individual hand strength across all rounds for winners (blue) and losers (red) by
    • intensity (columns) and direction (rows) of the exchange condition.
    • Fig. S3. Predicted probability of winning the game.
    • Fig. S4. Proportions of normative responses by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).
    • Fig. S5. Proportions of talent responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).
    • Fig. S6. Proportions of luck responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).
    • Fig. S7. Proportions of rules of the game responses as the most important factor by exchange condition, level of redistribution (0 = random, one-card, and two-card exchange), and outcome as winner (blue) or loser (red).
    • Fig. S8. Decomposition of the one-card and two-card RA exchange conditions.
    • Fig. S9. Proportions of the least important factor by winning status, exchange condition, and intensity of redistribution.
    • Reference (37)

    Download PDF

    Files in this Data Supplement:

Stay Connected to Science Advances

Navigate This Article