data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e1e6/7e1e61f01d233b91960c61442e748a5609c80a7c" alt="Man ultramarathon runner in the mountains he trains at sunset"
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Psychol.
Sec. Cognitive Science
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1521101
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Researchers have developed the framework of social value orientation (SVO) to describe individuals' prosocial tendencies. However, existing tools for measuring SVO lack sufficient attention to the effect of option inequality, driven by the inequality-aversion motive. In this research, we conducted an eye-tracking experiment to compare the traditional SVO measure with the inequality-controlled condition. We found that SVOs were lower when the fairness of options was controlled, indicating that traditional SVO measures may overestimate individuals' altruistic tendencies. We also found that information processing, including complexity, depth, and direction, varied when the fairness of options was controlled, demonstrating the role of inequality evaluation in SVO measurements. In addition, the predictive effect of relative time advantage becomes stronger when controlling for the option inequality, suggesting that controlling for option inequality enhances bottom-up information processing. Our findings indicate that existing tools for measuring SVO may lead to biases due to a lack of control over option inequality. This study provides insights into the potential role of fairness in future SVO measurements and sheds light on the underlying process mechanisms.
Keywords: Social value orientation, SVO Ring, Inequality, Eye-tracking, Information Processing
Received: 03 Nov 2024; Accepted: 17 Feb 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Wang, Wei, Chen, Na, Gou and Liu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Hong-Zhi Liu, Department of Social Psychology, Zhouenlai School of Government, Nankai University, Tianjin, 300350, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.