*4.5. Dictator/Proposer Comparison*

*Result 4: Both reflective and intuitive subjects increase their offer in the ultimatum games relative to their transfer in the dictator game.*

Across all subjects, the average transfer in the *dictator game* was DKK 30.4 and the average offer in the *ultimatum game* was DKK 43.5. Applying a Wilcoxon Sign Rank test, these means are significantly different (*p* < 0.001). Applying the test when distinguishing between *reflective* and *intuitive* subjects yields the same conclusion (*p s* < 0.001). Thus, both the *reflective* and *intuitive* subjects increase their offer in the *ultimatum game* relative to their transfer in the *dictator game*.

More than half of the subjects (50.4%) chose to increase their offer in the *ultimatum game* compared to their transfer in the *dictator game*—exhibiting strategic fairness. 52.9% of the *reflective* and 43.8% of the non-*reflective* subjects opted for this decision. This difference is not statistically significant (*p* > 0.21, *<sup>χ</sup>*<sup>2</sup> <sup>−</sup> *test*).

When controlling for gender, *reflective* subjects are estimated to be 4%-points more likely to exhibit strategic fairness than *non-reflective* subjects. However, the effect is not statistically significant. *Reflective* subjects are predicted to exhibit strategic fairness with a probability of 51.3% as opposed to a predicted probability of 47.3% for those *non-reflective* (see Table 1).
