Averting the Tragedy of the Commons: Using Social Psychological Science to Protect the Environment

ABSTRACT— Many local and global environmental challenges are tragedies-of-the-commons dilemmas in which private and collective interests are frequently at odds. Recent developments in social psychological theory and research suggest that in such commons dilemmas people are not just motivated by narrow (economic) self-interest but that they also consider the broader implications of their decisions for others and for the natural environment. Based on a core-motives analysis, I identify four necessary components for designing interventions to protect the environment: (a) information, (b) identity, (c) institutions, and (d) incentives, and discuss their utility and the feasibility of incorporating them.     

Social identity gratifications of social network sites and their impact on collective action participation

Collective action has been studied by social psychologists for over a century. Social network sites such as Facebook have further extended the ability of individuals to instigate social, political and organizational change, and provide a new context in which to study collective action. Drawing on social identity theory (SIT), self‐categorization theory (SCT) and uses and gratifications theory (UGT), this study explores the role of individuals’ group identification, social identity gratifications (SIG) and Facebook group use intensity on their willingness to participate in collective actions instigated through a Facebook group. Members of a Facebook group representing a cause against management completed an online survey (N = 406). Factor analyses reveal that motivations based on psychological affiliation with the group explained the most variance for Facebook group use. Moreover, compared to Facebook group use intensity, SIG were the stronger mediator between group identification and willingness to participate in collective action. The study demonstrates the utility of blending concepts from SIT, SCT and UGT to explore how socially motivated uses of the media can predict collective actions.     

Collective action problems and conflicting obligations

Enormous harms, such as climate change, often occur as the result of large numbers of individuals acting separately. In collective action problems, an individual has so little chance of making a difference to these harms that changing their behavior has insignificant expected utility. Even so, it is intuitive that individuals in many collective action problems should not be parts of groups that cause these great harms. This paper gives an account of when we do and do not have obligations to change our behavior in collective action problems. It also addresses a question insufficiently explored in the literature on this topic: when obligations arising out of collective action problems conflict with other obligations, what should we do? The paper explains how to adjudicate conflicts involving two collective action problems and conflicts involving collective action problems and other sorts of obligations.     

睾酮对价值加工的影响——基于“累积前景”理论框架的决策行为研究

较多研究支持睾酮和决策中的风险寻求行为呈正相关,但是也有其他的研究未能发现这种关系。基于决策的累计前景理论,本研究使用动态估计参数估计任务(DEEP),结合计算模型的方法,对120名双盲给药、有安慰剂对照的被试进行睾酮对价值加工过程作用的探究。结果显示,睾酮减少了个体的概率扭曲以及增加了损失规避,但是没有引发明显的风险寻求行为,研究结果表明睾酮对个体的价值加工过程产生了影响,使个体对概率的感知更接近于客观值并且增加了对损失的敏感性。     

Applications of Prospect Theory to Political Science

Prospect theory is an alternative theory of choice under conditions of risk, and deviates from expected utility theory by positing that people evaluate choices with respect to gains and losses from a reference point. They tend to overweight losses with respect to comparable gains and engage in risk-averse behavior with respect to gains and risk-acceptant behavior with respect to losses. They also respond to probabilities in a non-linear manner. I begin with an overview of prospect theory and some of the evidence upon which it is based, and then consider some of the implications of the theory for American politics, international relations, and the law. I end with a brief discussion of some of the conceptual and methodological problems confronting the application of prospect theory to the study of politics.     

Collective action: Towards a dual-pathway model

Building on an articulation of two influential social-psychological approaches, this chapter suggests a dual-pathway model of collective action. In line with traditional social movement research, one pathway concerns the calculation of the costs and benefits of participation; the other pathway concerns collective identification processes as suggested by the social identity approach. Whereas the model's calculation pathway can be interpreted in terms of group members' instrumental involvement motivated by specific extrinsic rewards, the identification pathway seems to represent intrinsic involvement based on the internalisation of group-specific behavioural standards. Both pathways seem to operate independently, such that group members are pulled towards collective action by the expected external rewards while simultaneously being pushed towards this activity by an inner obligation to enact their (politicised) collective identity. Further applications of this model to forms of collective action other than social movement participation (e.g., collective helping) are discussed.     

基于预期理论的风险决策的神经机制

预期理论基于对期望效用理论的批判与发展,提出了价值函数与权重函数,对以往风险决策研究中所发现的现象进行了很好的预测与解释。预期理论的核心概念包括参照依赖、损失规避与权重函数。基于预期理论的一些决策偏差包括框架效应、禀赋效应和默认偏差也部分揭示了与人们风险决策有关的脑区。近年来,通过采用功能性核磁共振等脑成像手段对预期理论的一些核心成分进行的研究表明,涉及到人们风险决策的脑区主要有前额叶、纹状体、脑岛与杏仁核。未来的研究可以从预期理论的产生根源、个体发展以及遗传基因等角度进行进一步的探讨。     

Effects of gain versus loss and certain versus probable outcomes on social value orientations

In an experiment, the effects of types of outcomes on social value orientations (individualism, competition, pro‐social orientation) were investigated. Ninety‐nine students made 28 choices which affected outcomes (points to be converted into money) for themselves and another (unknown) person. About half of them started out with nothing but they could allocate positive outcomes (gains) to themselves and/or the other. The other half were told that they themselves and another person would start out with some outcomes but they could lose outcomes depending on the choices. For about half the participants it was certain that their choices would result in outcomes while for the other half outcomes would be likely rather than certain. The expected utility of the outcomes was the same in the four conditions. In accordance with prospect theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more individualistic in the conditions with losses than in the conditions with gains. In accordance with social comparison theory, it was expected and found that participants would be more competitive in the conditions with probable outcomes than in the conditions with certain outcomes. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Ideologies of Diversity and Inequality: Predicting Collective Action in Groups Varying in Ethnicity and Immigrant Status

Ideological positions regarding social diversity and status inequality are examined as predictors of people's willingness to engage in collective action. Using social dominance theory and social identity theory, we hypothesized that the relationships between ideology, ethnic identification, and orientation toward collective action will vary depending on the position of one's group. Comparisons were made between four U.S. groups: White natives, White immigrants, Black/Latino natives, and Black/Latino immigrants. Groups differed in their endorsement of social diversity and social inequality, as well as in their orientation toward collective action and their ethnic group identification. For all groups, ethnic identity mediated the link between ideology and collective action, but the valence and magnitude of paths differed as a function of ethnicity and immigrant status. Social diversity was more critical for U.S. immigrants (White and Black/Latino); social inequality accounted for more variance in native-born U.S. groups (although in opposite directions for the two groups).     

The priority heuristic: making choices without trade-offs

Bernoulli's framework of expected utility serves as a model for various psychological processes, including motivation, moral sense, attitudes, and decision making. To account for evidence at variance with expected utility, the authors generalize the framework of fast and frugal heuristics from inferences to preferences. The priority heuristic predicts (a) the Allais paradox, (b) risk aversion for gains if probabilities are high, (c) risk seeking for gains if probabilities are low (e.g., lottery tickets), (d) risk aversion for losses if probabilities are low (e.g., buying insurance), (e) risk seeking for losses if probabilities are high, (f) the certainty effect, (g) the possibility effect, and (h) intransitivities. The authors test how accurately the heuristic predicts people's choices, compared with previously proposed heuristics and 3 modifications of expected utility theory: security-potential/aspiration theory, transfer-of-attention-exchange model, and cumulative prospect theory.     

Evidence for utilitarian motives in emotion regulation

This investigation demonstrates that emotion regulation can be driven by considerations of utility per se. We show that as participants prepared for a negotiation, those who were motivated to confront (vs. collaborate with) another person believed that anger would be more useful to them. However, only participants who were motivated to confront another and expected to receive a monetary reward for their performance (i.e., high utility), were motivated to increase their anger in preparation for the negotiation. Participants who were motivated to confront another but did not expect their performance to be rewarded (i.e., low utility), did not try to increase their anger, even though they expected anger to be useful in the negotiation. Such patterns demonstrate that people are motivated to experience even unpleasant emotions to maximise utility.     

Virtual special issue on theory and research on collective action in the European Journal of Social Psychology

This virtual special issue presents a collection of 23 articles that present theory and research on collective action in the European Journal of Social Psychology. The articles are organized according to four major themes that emerged. In the first section, articles on identification with the disadvantaged group, identification with the superordinate group, and identity content as predictors of collective action are summarized. The second section combines articles examining the role of sociostructural variables (permeability, legitimacy, and stability) for collective action. The third section comprises articles on the psychological implications of sociostructural variables (emotions, efficacy beliefs, threat perceptions) as predictors of collective action. In the final section, articles that highlight the dynamic perspective on collective action are presented. This issue contains articles on collective action conducted by disadvantaged groups, advantaged groups, and opinion‐based groups. After the conceptual overview, commonalities and distinctions between the articles are highlighted, and some directions for future research are outlined. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Reference dependence in cumulative prospect theory

A central feature of (cumulative) prospect theory is reference dependence, i.e. the value function depends on gains and losses relative to a status quo and not on final wealth positions as in expected utility theory. Until now, all theoretical work on prospect theory only considered a fixed status quo. In this case, however, reference dependence and the dependence of the value function on final wealth positions are equivalent concepts, at least if the status quo is known. In order to identify the differences between both concepts, an axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory is developed which allows for a variable status quo. In this framework a preference condition can be formulated which discriminates between reference dependence and the dependence on final wealth positions. Furthermore, this framework allows one to analyze in which way the shape of the value and weighting functions change with increasing status quo. With respect to this question several hypotheses are defined and characterized in terms of preference conditions.     

Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action

Social identity, shared grievances, and group efficacy beliefs are well-known antecedents to collective action, but existing research overlooks the fact that collective action often involves a confrontation between those who are motivated to defend the status quo and those who seek to challenge it. Using nationally representative data from New Zealand (Study 1; N = 16,147) and a large online sample from the United States (Study 2; N = 1,513), we address this oversight and demonstrate that system justification is negatively associated with system-challenging collective action, but positively associated with system-supporting collective action, for members of both low-status and high-status groups. Group identification, group-based injustice, group-based anger, and system-based dissatisfaction/anger mediated these relationships. These findings constitute the first empirical integration of system justification theory into a model of collective action that explains when people will act collectively to challenge—and, just as importantly, defend—the status quo.     

想象积极群际接触对利他型集体行动意愿的影响:系统公正感和群际评价的中介作用

集体行动是维护和实现社会公平正义的有效途径之一。以往研究主要聚焦于弱势群体利己型集体行动,很少有研究考察利他型集体行动的影响因素。本研究采用双随机设计,通过三个实验探讨积极群际接触与利他型集体行动的中介效应因果模型。实验1采用想象性群际接触范式操纵积极群际接触,发现积极群际接触促进利他型集体行动,系统公正感和群际评价中的热情维度起中介作用。实验2与实验3分别操纵系统公正感和热情,检验中介变量与因变量间的因果关系,证实了积极群际接触-系统公正感、热情-利他型集体行动的因果关系链。     

Power Politics and the Balance of Risk: Hypotheses on Great Power Intervention in the Periphery

Great powers frequently initiate risky diplomatic and military interventions in the periphery—regions that do not directly threaten the security of a great power's homeland. Such risky interventions are driven by leaders' aversion to losses in their state's relative power, international status, or prestige. These leaders often persist in such courses of action even when they incur mounting political, economic, and military costs. More surprisingly, they undertake risky strategies toward other great powers in an effort to continue these failing interventions. Hypotheses concerning such interventions are derived from the prospect theory and defensive realist literatures.     

Prospect relativity: how choice options influence decision under risk

In many theories of decision under risk (e.g., expected utility theory, rank-dependent utility theory, and prospect theory), the utility of a prospect is independent of other options in the choice set. The experiments presented here show a large effect of the available options, suggesting instead that prospects are valued relative to one another. The judged certainty equivalent for a prospect is strongly influenced by the options available. Similarly, the selection of a preferred prospect is strongly influenced by the prospects available. Alternative theories of decision under risk (e.g., the stochastic difference model, multialternative decision field theory, and range frequency theory), where prospects are valued relative to one another, can provide an account of these context effects.     

Do Politicians Take Risks Like the Rest of Us? An Experimental Test of Prospect Theory Under MPs

Political psychologists have been quick to use prospect theory in their work, realizing its potential for explaining decisions under risk. Applying prospect theory to political decision‐making is not without problems, though, and here we address two of these: (1) Does prospect theory actually apply to political decision‐makers, or are politicians unlike the rest of us? (2) Which dimension do politicians use as their reference point when there are multiple dimensions (e.g., votes and policy)? We address both problems in an experiment with a unique sample of Dutch members of parliament as participants. We use well‐known (incentivized) decision situations and newly developed hypothetical political decision‐making scenarios. Our results indicate that politicians’ deviate from expected utility theory in the direction predicted by prospect theory but that these deviations are somewhat smaller than those of other people. Votes appear to be a more important determinant of politicians’ reference point than is policy.     

The social affirmation use of social media as a motivator of collective action

The mobilizing potential of the internet has been widely recognized but also sharply criticized. We propose and test in two studies that the social affirmation use of social media motivates individuals for collective action to achieve social change. In Study 1, we surveyed participants of a university occupation and found that enduring participation was predicted by social affirmation use, mediated by group identification. In Study 2 we experimentally tested our hypothesis, the results of which confirmed that the social affirmation use of a forum (and in particular its interactive aspect) motivated individuals for collective action to achieve social change. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of our findings for theory and research on the mobilizing potential of the internet.