‘Renqing’ or equity? The influence of favor acceptance on inequity aversion

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1452

Abstract

Abstract:

Equity and reciprocity are crucial guidelines for human interactions. While these principles often complement each other, there are instances where reciprocity can lead to breaches of fairness, such as in cases of bribery. Previous research has predominantly focused on the impacts of equity and reciprocity on behavior respectively, with limited exploration into situations where these principles conflict. This issue is particularly pertinent in China, where Renqing holds significant importance. This study aimed to investigate how participants navigate trade-offs when faced with conflicts between Renqing and equity, specifically examining how receiving a favor influences participants’ inequity aversion.

Five experiments were conducted to validate the research hypothesis. In Experiment 1A, we recruited college students (n = 124) and employed a scenario-based questionnaire to explore the impact of accepting large favors on inequity aversion (refusal behavior in ultimatum game). Experiment 1B (n = 250) was a replication of Experiment 1A with additional tests of mediation through gratitude and indebtedness, and with a more diverse sample. Experiment 2A (n = 120) adopted a similar scenario-based method to investigate the effects of “small favors” on inequity aversion and further assessed the mediating role of gratitude and indebtedness. Experiment 2B (n = 92) corroborated the findings of Experiment 2A by manipulating “small favors” in a controlled laboratory setting. Finally, Experiment 3 (n = 168) manipulated favors of different scale to further investigate the potential threshold at which the asymmetric mediation mechanism shifts under varying favor conditions.

Consistent with our expectations, the results showed that receiving favors, whether substantial or minor, significantly reduced individuals’ inequity aversion behavior, leading to a greater tolerance of inequity distribution schemes. This suggests that when the principle of reciprocity conflicts with the principle of equity, participants are more likely to prioritize reciprocity. More importantly, when we included both gratitude and indebtedness as mediators in our model, we discovered an asymmetry in their effects. Specifically, under conditions involving substantial favors (Experiment 1B), the emotion of indebtedness mediated the influence of receiving favors on inequity aversion. Under conditions involving moderate favors, both gratitude and indebtedness simultaneously served as mediators (Experiment 3). However, under conditions involving minor favors (Experiments 2A~3), the emotion of gratitude, rather than indebtedness, served as the mediator. This highlights the distinct roles that gratitude and indebtedness play in moderating responses to favors of varying magnitudes.

These findings help enhance people’s understanding of the fundamental principles of interpersonal interactions (i.e., reciprocity and equity), and shed light on the importance of policy development by various governments in order to mitigate equity violations resulting from Renqing.

Key words: equity principle, reciprocity principle, inequity aversion, gratitude, indebtedness

WANG Zuo-Jun, YE Yan, CHENG Xue-Yan, XU Sihua. (2025). ‘Renqing’ or equity? The influence of favor acceptance on inequity aversion. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(8), 1452-1467.

Figures/Tables 20

References 61

[1]	Algoe, S. B. (2012). Find, remind, and bind: The functions of gratitude in everyday relationships. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(6), 455-469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2012.00439.x
[2]	Bartlett, M. Y., & DeSteno, D. (2006). Gratitude and prosocial behavior: Helping when it costs you. Psychological Science, 17(4), 319-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01705.x URL pmid: 16623689
[3]	Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323
[4]	Chae, J., Kim, K., Kim, Y., Lim, G., Kim, D., & Kim, H. (2022). Ingroup favoritism overrides fairness when resources are limited. Scientific Reports, 12(1), Article 4560. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08460-1
[5]	Chao, M. (2018). Intentions-based reciprocity to monetary and non- monetary gifts. Games, 9(4), Article 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/g9040074
[6]	Chapkovski, P., Peer, E., & Brandt, E. (2024). From WEIRD to GREAT? Exploring data quality of global platforms for online research. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/xvfqn
[7]	Chen, P., Zhang, Y., Hu, X., & Mai, X. (2024). Age differences of responders’ decision-making in disadvantageous and advantageous inequality contexts in the ultimatum game: The role of social value orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 220, Article 112521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2023.112521
[8]	Chen, S. P., & Bo, X. (2016). The influence of unfairness and punishment price to the demand of third-party punishment. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 14(3), 372-376.
[9]	Cialdini, R. B. Ed. (2007). Influence: The psychology of persuasion (pp. 16-22). New York: Collins.
[10]	Cook, K. S., & Hegtvedt, K. A. (1983). Distributive justice, equity, and equality. Annual Review of Sociology, 9(1), 217-241. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.09.080183.001245
[11]	Dawkins. M. B., Sloane. S., & Baillargeon. R. (2019). Do infants in the first year of life expect equal resource allocations? Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00116
[12]	Degutis, M., Urbonavičius, S., Hollebeek, L. D., & Anselmsson, J. (2023). Consumers’ willingness to disclose their personal data in e-commerce: A reciprocity-based social exchange perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 74, Article 103385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103385
[13]	Flynn, F. J., & Yu, A. (2021). Better to give than reciprocate? Status and reciprocity in prosocial exchange. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 121(1), 115-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000349 doi: 10.1037/pspi0000349 URL pmid: 33492155
[14]	Gao, X., Jolly, E., Yu, H., Liu, H., Zhou, X., & Chang, L. J. (2020). The hidden cost of receiving favors: A theory of indebtedness. BioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.03.926295
[15]	Gao, X., Jolly, E., Yu, H., Liu, H., Zhou, X., & Chang, L. J. (2024). The psychological, computational, and neural foundations of indebtedness. Nature Communications, 15(1), Article 68. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-44286-9
[16]	Goyal, N., Adams, M. M., Wice, M., Sullivan, S., & Miller, J. G. (2022). Gratitude endures while indebtedness persuades: Investigating the unique influences of gratitude and indebtedness in helping. Cognition and Emotion, 36(7), 1361-1373. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2022.2118237
[17]	Greenberg, M.S. (1980). A Theory of Indebtedness. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange (pp.3-26). Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3087-5_1
[18]	Halali, E., Bereby-Meyer, Y., & Meiran, N. (2014). Between self- interest and reciprocity: The social bright side of self-control failure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033824
[19]	Hameed, A., & Khwaja, M. G. (2023). Employee gratitude: A win-win for the employer and the employee. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 10(2), 303-326. https://doi.org/10.1177/23220937221101261
[20]	Han, Y. D. (2023-06-01). Crack down on the corruption behind the “Renqing”. The Central Commission for Discipline Inspection of the Communist Party of China Website. Retrieved June 25, 2024, from https://www.ccdi.gov.cn/toutiaon/202306/t20230621_270947.html
[21]	Hitokoto, H. (2016). Indebtedness in cultural context: The role of culture in the felt obligation to reciprocate. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 19(1), 16-25. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12122
[22]	Hoffmann, R., Kanitsar, G., & Seifert, M. (2024). Behavioral barriers impede pro-environmental decision-making: Experimental evidence from incentivized laboratory and vignette studies. Ecological Economics, 225, Article 108347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108347
[23]	House, B. R., Kanngiesser, P., Barrett, H. C., Yilmaz, S., Smith, A. M., Sebastian-Enesco, C.,... Silk, J. B. (2020). Social norms and cultural diversity in the development of third-party punishment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 287(1925), Article 20192794. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.2794
[24]	Hu, G. X., Liu, Y. Z., Wang, H., He, N., & Chen, X. X. (2020). Effect of ego-depletion on altruistic punishment: The role of anger and justice sensitivity. Journal of Psychological Science, 43(1), 117-124. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20200117
[25]	Hu, X., & Mai, X. (2021). Social value orientation modulates fairness processing during social decision-making: Evidence from behavior and brain potentials. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 16(7), 670-682. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsab032
[26]	Keysar, B., Converse, B. A., Wang, J., & Epley, N. (2008). Reciprocity is not give and take: Asymmetric reciprocity to positive and negative acts. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1280-1286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02223.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02223.x URL pmid: 19121138
[27]	Li, S., Luan, M., Li, H., & Fu, G. Q. (2024). How gifts convey love? The influence of feasible and desirable gifts on mating intention. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 56(11), 1524-1540. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.01524 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.01524 URL
[28]	Li, X., Zhu, P., Yu, Y., Zhang, J., & Zhang, Z. (2017). The effect of reciprocity disposition on giving and repaying reciprocity behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 109, 201-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.007
[29]	Lilleheie, I., Debesay, J., Bye, A., & Bergland, A. (2021). The tension between carrying a burden and feeling like a burden: A qualitative study of informal caregivers’ and care recipients’ experiences after patient discharge from hospital. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 16(1), Article 1855751. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2020.1855751
[30]	Liu, G., Cui, Z., Yu, H., Rotshtein, P., Zhao, F., Wang, H.,... Sui, J. (2020). Neural responses to intention and benefit appraisal are critical in distinguishing gratitude and joy. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article 7864. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-64720-y
[31]	Lv, S-S., Sun, X., Shen, L-L., Wu, Y-Q., Zhao, S., Wang, F., & Wang, Z-J. (2021). Effect of group membership on unfairness perception under coexperience conditions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(7), 773-787. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00773 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00773 URL
[32]	Ma, L. K., Tunney, R. J., & Ferguson, E. (2017). Does gratitude enhance prosociality? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 143(6), 601-635. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000103
[33]	McCullough, M. E., Kilpatrick, S. D., Emmons, R. A., & Larson, D. B. (2001). Is gratitude a moral affect? Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 249-266. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.249 URL pmid: 11316013
[34]	Molleman, L., van den Broek, E., & Egas, M. (2013). Personal experience and reputation interact in human decisions to help reciprocally. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 280(1757), Article 20123044. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.3044
[35]	Nelson, J. M., Hardy, S. A., Tice, D., & Schnitker, S. A. (2024). Returning thanks to God and others: Prosocial consequences of transcendent indebtedness. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 19(1), 121-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2023.2190926
[36]	Ostermaier, A., & Schäfer, P. (2024). Do good intentions pay off? Employee responses to well-intended actions with risky outcomes. European Accounting Review, 33(1), 313-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2022.2085132
[37]	Peng, C. (2020). The bittersweet flavor of a favor: Gratitude, indebtedness, and social exchange [Unpublished doctorial dissertation]. Tilburg University.
[38]	Peng, C., Nelissen, R., & Zeelenberg, M. (2024). Emotional consequences of social debt sharing in communal relationships. Emotion, 24(1), 225-233. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001271
[39]	Peng, C., Nelissen, R. M. A., & Zeelenberg, M. (2018). Reconsidering the roles of gratitude and indebtedness in social exchange. Cognition and Emotion, 32(4), 760-772. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2017.1353484
[40]	Puhr, R., Heinze, G., Nold, M., Lusa, L., & Geroldinger, A. (2017). Firth’s logistic regression with rare events: Accurate effect estimates and predictions? Statistics in Medicine, 36(14), 2302-2317. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.7273
[41]	Qiu, F., Mai, K. M., & Ellis, A. P. (2025). Examining the hindering effects of receiving help on internal reporting of unethical behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2872
[42]	Rosseel, Y. (2012). Iavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
[43]	Schaumberg, R., & Flynn, F. J. (2009). Differentiating between grateful and indebted reactions to receiving help. In S. R. Thye, & E. J. Lawler (Eds.), Altruism and prosocial behavior in groups (pp. 105-132). Leeds, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0882-6145(2009)0000026008
[44]	Schmid, L., Chatterjee, K., Hilbe, C., & Nowak, M. A. (2021). A unified framework of direct and indirect reciprocity. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(10), 1292-1302. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01114-8 doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01114-8 URL pmid: 33986519
[45]	Shen, L-L., Yuan, B., Wei, Y-Y., Miao, X-Y., & Wang, Z-J. (2020). Sharing unfairness decreases unfairness perception. Journal of Psychological Science, 43(2), 473-480. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20200230
[46]	Shi, H., Cai, S., & Luo, X. R. (2023). Online free product sampling: The reciprocity and diagnosticity effects. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 24(3), 194-214.
[47]	Stsiampkouskaya, K., Joinson, A., & Piwek, L. (2023). To like or not to like? An experimental study on relational closeness, social grooming, reciprocity, and emotions in social media liking. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(2), Article zmac036. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac036
[48]	Tangpong, C., Li, J., & Hung, K. T. (2016). Dark side of reciprocity norm: Ethical compromise in business exchanges. Industrial Marketing Management, 55, 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.02.015
[49]	Thompson, P. S., & Bolino, M. C. (2018). Negative beliefs about accepting coworker help: Implications for employee attitudes, job performance, and reputation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(8), 842-866. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000300 doi: 10.1037/apl0000300 URL pmid: 29658737
[50]	Tsang, J. A. (2007). Gratitude for small and large favors: A behavioral test. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(3), 157-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701229019
[51]	Vale, H., Schuster, L., & Greer, D. A. (2024). Gifts to incentivise donations from young consumers: An ethical tension. Young Consumers, 25(6), 771-786. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-11-2023-1908
[52]	van Baar, J. M., Klaassen, F. H., Ricci, F., Chang, L. J., & Sanfey, A. G. (2020). Stable distribution of reciprocity motives in a population. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article 18164. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74818-y
[53]	Van Dijk, E., & De Dreu, C. K. (2021). Experimental games and social decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1), 415-438. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-081420-110718
[54]	Wang, X., Zheng, X., & Zhao, S. (2022). Repaying the debt: An examination of the relationship between perceived organizational support and unethical pro-organizational behavior by low performers. Journal of Business Ethics, 179(3), 697-709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04809-0
[55]	Wörle, M., Essler, S., & Paulus, M. (2020). Paying it back and forward: The impact of experiencing and observing others’ sharing and stinginess on preschoolers’ own sharing behavior and expectations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 198, Article 104886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104886
[56]	Xie, W-L., Wang, Z-J., Wang, F., & Zhang, L. (2013). A review on cooperation from the point of view of evolutionary psychology. Advances in Psychological Science, 21(11), 2057-2063. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.02057 doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.02057 URL
[57]	Xu, J., Sun, X-C., Dong, Y., Wang, Z-J, Li, W-Q., & Yuan, B. (2017). Compensation or punishment—The effect of social distance on third-party intervention. Journal of Psychological Science, 40(5), 1175-1181. https://doi.org/10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20170523
[58]	Ye, S., Chen, L., & Qu, Y. E. (2024). Demystifying benevolent leadership: When subordinates feel obligated to undertake illegitimate tasks. Journal of Business Ethics, 195(3), 537-561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05631-0
[59]	Yoder, K. J., & Decety, J. (2020). Me first: Neural representations of fairness during three-party interactions. Neuropsychologia, 147, Article 107576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107576
[60]	Zhu, R., Xu, Z., Su, S., Feng, C., Luo, Y., Tang, H.,... Liu, C. (2021). From gratitude to injustice: Neurocomputational mechanisms of gratitude-induced injustice. NeuroImage, 245, Article 118730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118730
[61]	Zhu, R., Xu, Z., Tang, H., Wang, H., Zhang, S., Zhang, Z.,... Liu, C. (2020). The dark side of gratitude: Gratitude could lead to moral violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 91, Article 104048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104048

Favor	Experiment 1B (80 RMB large favor)		Experiment 2A (2 RMB small favor)		Experiment 2B (Non-monetary small favor)		Experiment 3 (20~60 RMB favor)
Favor	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	20 RMB	40 RMB	60 RMB
Gratitude	0.84^*** (1.40)	2.19^*** (0.97)	?0.95^*** (1.62)	0.79^*** (1.54)	?1.00^*** (1.40)	1.88^*** (1.28)	?1.06^*** (0.89)	0.55^** (1.02)	0.97^*** (0.79)	1.11^*** (0.78)
Indebtedness	?1.36^*** (1.31)	0.22 (1.67)	?1.75^* (1.29)	?0.60^*** (1.75)	?1.55^*** (1.28)	?1.60^*** (1.24)	?1.21^*** (0.91)	?0.14 (1.07)	?0.14 (1.26)	0.27 (1.11)

Favor	Experiment 1B (80 RMB large favor)		Experiment 2A (2 RMB small favor)		Experiment 2B (Non-monetary small favor)		Experiment 3 (20~60 RMB favor)
Favor	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	20 RMB	40 RMB	60 RMB
Gratitude	0.84^*** (1.40)	2.19^*** (0.97)	?0.95^*** (1.62)	0.79^*** (1.54)	?1.00^*** (1.40)	1.88^*** (1.28)	?1.06^*** (0.89)	0.55^** (1.02)	0.97^*** (0.79)	1.11^*** (0.78)
Indebtedness	?1.36^*** (1.31)	0.22 (1.67)	?1.75^* (1.29)	?0.60^*** (1.75)	?1.55^*** (1.28)	?1.60^*** (1.24)	?1.21^*** (0.91)	?0.14 (1.07)	?0.14 (1.26)	0.27 (1.11)

Parameters	Full model				The simplest model
Parameters	b	SE	z	p	b	SE	z	p
Intercept	5.69	1.09	5.24	<0.001	12.91	1.58	8.17	<0.001
Favor	2.46	1.77	1.40	0.163
Distribution Schemes 7∶3	?10.33	1.95	?5.31	<0.001	?24.77	1.97	?12.59	<0.001
Distribution Schemes 8∶2	?16.60	2.84	?5.84	<0.001	?40.62	2.79	?14.58	<0.001
Distribution Schemes 9∶1	?20.98	3.80	?5.51	<0.001	?54.32	3.75	?14.49	<0.001
Favor × Distribution Schemes 7∶3	?2.27	2.02	?1.12	0.262
Favor × Distribution Schemes 8∶2	?0.82	2.34	?0.35	0.726
Favor × Distribution Schemes 9∶1	2.48	2.73	0.91	0.364
AIC	337.00				252.00
BIC	374.85				273.03
N	124				124

Parameters	Full model				The simplest model
Parameters	b	SE	z	p	b	SE	z	p
Intercept	5.69	1.09	5.24	<0.001	12.91	1.58	8.17	<0.001
Favor	2.46	1.77	1.40	0.163
Distribution Schemes 7∶3	?10.33	1.95	?5.31	<0.001	?24.77	1.97	?12.59	<0.001
Distribution Schemes 8∶2	?16.60	2.84	?5.84	<0.001	?40.62	2.79	?14.58	<0.001
Distribution Schemes 9∶1	?20.98	3.80	?5.51	<0.001	?54.32	3.75	?14.49	<0.001
Favor × Distribution Schemes 7∶3	?2.27	2.02	?1.12	0.262
Favor × Distribution Schemes 8∶2	?0.82	2.34	?0.35	0.726
Favor × Distribution Schemes 9∶1	2.48	2.73	0.91	0.364
AIC	337.00				252.00
BIC	374.85				273.03
N	124				124

Parameters	Full model				The simplest model
Parameters	b	SE	z	p	b	SE	z	p
Intercept	0.67	0.37	1.79	0.073	0.57	0.35	1.62	0.106
Favor	0.93	0.54	1.73	0.084	1.14	0.48	2.35	0.019
Distribution Schemes	?4.05	0.59	?6.89	<0.001	?3.74	0.44	?8.53	<0.001
Favor × Distribution Schemes	0.56	0.65	0.87	0.384
AIC	493.60				492.37
BIC	514.63				509.20
N	124				124