>>6634
>psychology study using self reported data
Why does anybody ever take this stuff seriously? I know it's difficult and at times unethical to get data in other ways, but this usually is like searching for your keys under a streetlight.
The only non-self reported data in that study was from asking the participants in the second study whether they would be willing to donate part of the $100 (leaf) they could potentially get from a draw. It doesn't say how many $100 prizes were given to the 524 participants in that experiment (the first study had three draws for 297 participants, the second one only mentions "a draw", possibly only one draw for the 524 participants?), but in any case the only actual, verified data in the whole study comes from "Would you be willing to give away a fraction of a prize that you are almost certainly not going to win anyway?"