Cultural Values in Intergroup and Single-Group Social Dilemmas

Do cultural values influence the manner in which people cooperate with one another? This study assessed cultural characteristics of individuals and then related these characteristics to cooperative behavior in social dilemmas. Participants were assessed for their degree of vertical and horizontal individualism and collectivism, cultural values identified by Triandis (1995). They made choices in either a single-group or an intergroup social dilemma. The single-group dilemma entailed a three-person dilemma; the intergroup dilemma was identical but added subgroup competition, i.e., an opposing three-person group. The results indicated an interaction between cultural characteristics and type of dilemma for cooperation. The single-group versus intergroup effect reported by Bornstein and Ben-Yossef (1994) was replicated, but only for vertical individualists. The vertical individualists were least cooperative in the single-group dilemma but were more cooperative in the intergroup dilemma-where cooperation with the group maximized personal outcomes. The vertical collectivists were most cooperative in the single-group dilemma but were less cooperative in the intergroup dilemma- where group defection resulted in maximum group outcomes. The horizontal individualists and collectivists exhibited an intermediate level of cooperation, with no differences in cooperation between the single-group and intergroup dilemmas. Taken together, the results suggest that the relationship between cultural values and cooperation, in particular with reference to vertical and horizontal components of individualism and collectivism, is more complex than has been suggested in past research. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.     

高功能孤独症儿童的合作行为

合作行为是一种重要的亲社会行为, 对儿童的社会适应具有重要意义, 而孤独症儿童的典型特征是社会功能存在缺陷, 从而导致合作行为的缺乏。以往研究未能就孤独症儿童在不同合作任务类型中的表现做出区分, 本研究采用经典的囚徒困境博弈和合作性工具任务比较了6~12岁的高功能孤独症儿童和正常发展儿童在不同任务中的合作行为。结果显示高功能孤独症儿童和正常儿童在囚徒困境中的合作行为没有显著差异, 然而, 他们在工具性任务中表现出比正常儿童更低水平的合作行为。这说明高功能孤独症儿童在对认知能力有不同要求的合作任务中的表现不同。     

Job Characteristics and Biases in Subordinates' Appraisals of Managers

This article develops a general model relating job characteristics to biases in the perception of managers' abilities. A 2 x 2 x 2 between-subjects design was used to vary managerial task complexity, subordinate task complexity, and managers' rates of giving orders. The subjects were 216 upper-level undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to 72 three-person groups. Relative, but not absolute, levels of task complexity biased subordinates' evaluations of managers. This finding is consistent with equity theory and with leadership theories that emphasize the relative contributions of leaders and group members. Procedures that increased order-giving increased subordinates' appraisals of managers when managers performed either relatively more or relatively less complex work than did subordinates, but had no effect under equal complexity conditions. The results are discussed in terms of leader-member exchange theories and contingency theories of leadership (Dienesch & Liden, 1986; Fiedler & Chemers, 1984; Graen, Novak, & Sommerkamp, 1982; Kerr & Jermier, 1978).     

Does parochial cooperation exist in childhood and adolescence? A meta-analysis

Although previous meta-analytic evidence supports the existence of parochialism in cooperation among adults, the extent to which children and adolescents are more willing to incur a personal cost to benefit ingroups, compared to outgroups, is not yet clear. We provide the first meta-analysis on the existence and magnitude of parochialism in cooperation among pre-adults. Based on 20 experimental economics studies (k = 69, N = 5268, age = 3–19, 12 countries, published 2008–2019), a multilevel meta-analytic model revealed a small overall effect size indicating that children and adolescents were more cooperative towards ingroups (d = 0.22, 95% CI [0.07, 0.38]). A series of single-moderator analyses tested for the following conditions: participant age and sex; game type ([mini-]dictator game, prisoner's dilemma, public goods dilemma, trust game, ultimatum game); outcome interdependence; membership manipulation (between- vs. within-subjects); group type (natural vs. experimental); reward type (monetary vs. non-monetary); and country of the participant. Parochial cooperation did not vary with participants' age. Parochialism was larger in non-interdependent (dictator-type) compared to interdependent (bargaining and social dilemma) games. There were no moderating effects of group type, membership manipulation or reward type. To provide more data on how parochialism develops, primary studies should report age ranges more precisely and use more restricted age groups.     

Working Together but in Opposition: An Examination of the "Good-Cop/Bad-Cop" Negotiating Team Tactic

Unlike solo negotiators, members of negotiating teams may for strategic reasons choose to play different roles; the familiar “good cop/bad cop” distributive bargaining tactic is one example of role differentiation designed to enhance a team's success at the bargaining table. In two empirical studies about a hypothetical three-person work group, we examined the cognitive processes underlying this tactic using a social-cognitive decision model (Brodt & Duncan, 1998) that conceptualizes the negotiators' decision tasks and persuasion processes. Results generally supported the model except for an intriguing asymmetry depending on a person's initial inclination (accepting, rejecting). This research extends findings on the tactic and on contrast effects (Cialdini, 1984) and supports the model's usefulness as an approximate representation of negotiator cognition.     

Bargaining strength and group polarization in intergroup negotiations

In the context of a labour-management simulation study, three-man union teams were made to believe that they had either a very strong or a very weak bargaining position vis-à-vis the other party. In half of each of these conditions, a cooperative and a competitive orientation toward the other group was induced. In preparation for the intergroup negotiations, the subjects were first asked to indicate their individual aspirations for three negotiation issues. After a group discussion, their collective aspirations were obtained. Regardless of the experimental conditions. groups set significantly higher aspiration levels than individuals on the most important issue but were more conservative and cautious on less important issues. In general, for all three topics, significant or near-significant interactions were found between bargaining strength and the direction of the group-induced shift. In the strong bargaining condition, groups set higher aspiration levels than the average of prior individual judgments; in the weak bargaining condition the opposite trend occurred. An effort was made to relate these findings to the various theories developed in the ‘risky-shift’ literature.     

The effects of commitment to threats and promises upon bargaining behaviour and outcomes

The course of bargaining is determined in part by interdependent individuals exchanging messages so as to influence other's behaviour, and thereby to increase the likelihood of achieving outcomes consistent with their own goals. The communication of threats and promises are two major message strategies that are employed to influence the behaviour of others in a bargaining relationship. The present study examines the effects of players' level of commitment to these forms of message strategies upon behaviour in a duopoly bargaining task. Past research has oprationalized commitment in terms of the consistency with which an individual has followed through on threats or promises in the past. In the present research, Becker's (1960) concept of a side-bet is employed to provide an alternative means for defining and manipulating commitment. A side-bet obtains when either a threatener or a promiser posts a valued resource, say a bond, which they forfeit if they do not follow through on their stated threat or promise. The main expectations of the present study were that increased commitment to threat meassages would lead to more competitive behaviour and outcomes within a duopoly bargaining task, whereas increased commitment to promise messages would produce more cooperative behaviour and outcomes. Partial support for these major expectations, as well as confirmation of a number of secondary expectations, was obtained.     

Effect of Self- and Group Efficacy on Group Performance in a Mixed-Motive Situation

The effect of self- and group efficacy on the performance of three-person (N = 26) and seven-person (N = 28) groups on a mixed-motive investment task was investigated. The correlations between group efficacy for making money and the actual amount of money made by the groups were positive and significant. The relation between group efficacy and the group's performance was reciprocal. The results also indicated that members of three-person groups had significantly higher perceptions of group efficacy than members of seven-person groups even though they faced the identical mixed-motive investment task. The correlations between group efficacy and the group's performance were significantly higher than the correlations between aggregated values of self-efficacy for individual performance and the group's performance. Finally, multiple regression analyses showed that self-efficacy for individual performance had a negative effect on the group's performance.     

Positive Effects of Within-Group Cooperation on Between-Group Negotiation1

The present study simulated an organizational dispute to test two sets of alternative hypotheses regarding the effects of within-group cooperation and conflict on a subsequent negotiation with an out-group. The first set of hypotheses concerned in-group cooperation. We expected that either (a) in-group cooperation would produce greater cooperation toward an out-group, the result of a carryover effect; or (b) in-group cooperation would increase group cohesiveness and strengthen group boundaries, and thus produce greater competitiveness toward an out-group. The second set of alternative hypotheses concerned in-group conflict. We expected that either (a) in-group conflict would produce greater competitiveness toward an out-group, the result of a carry-over effect; or (b) in-group conflict would decrease group cohesiveness and weaken group boundaries, and thus produce less competitiveness toward an out-group. Subjects in three-person groups negotiated first with one another on a cooperative or competitive task, and then as a group, with another group. The data supported the carryover hypothesis for the effects of both in-group cooperation and conflict. Groups that experienced internal cooperation were more cooperative in the subsequent between-group negotiation and, to a lesser extent, groups that experienced internal conflict were more competitive in the subsequent between-group negotiation, relative to a control condition that had no prior in-group negotiation. Taken together, the results were consistent with recent research on dispute intervention that suggested that mediators in between-group conflict should foster within-group cooperation prior to between-group negotiations.     

Predicting the size of individual and

An a priori test of the difference engine model (Myerson, Hale, Zheng, Jenkins, & Widaman, 2003) was conducted using a large, diverse sample of individuals who performed three speeded verbal tasks and three speeded visuospatial tasks. Results demonstrated that, as predicted by the model, the group standard deviation (SD) on any task was proportional to the amount of processing required by that task. Both individual performances as well as those of fast and slow subgroups could be accurately predicted by the model using no free parameters, just an individual or subgroup’s mean z-score and the values of theoretical constructs estimated from fits to the group SDs. Taken together, these results are consistent with post hoc analyses reported by Myerson et al. and provide even stronger supporting evidence. In particular, the ability to make quantitative predictions without using any free parameters provides the clearest demonstration to date of the power of an analytic approach on the basis of the difference engine.     

Group transformation: How demonstrability promotes intra-group cooperation in social dilemmas

Intra-group cooperation in a social dilemma is increased after a group has discussed and reached a decision, especially if the dilemma is easily understood (‘demonstrable’). This paper examines how demonstrability affects the decision of a group that consists entirely of participants who are initially non-cooperative. Thirty-eight 6-person groups with unanimous prior preference for cooperation or non-cooperation discussed a prisoner’s dilemma before making a group decision. When demonstrability was low groups reflected the prior (either cooperative or non-cooperative) preferences of their members. When demonstrability was high we found that groups showed no effect of prior preference. Specifically, groups of prior non-cooperators made more cooperative group decisions and subsequently their members remained cooperative when asked to express preferences individually. The combined advantages of group process and high demonstrability for facilitating optimal cooperation are discussed.     

Somatic Markers and Response Reversal: Is There Orbitofrontal Cortex Dysfunction in Boys with Psychopathic Tendencies?

This study investigated the performance of boys with psychopathic tendencies and comparison boys, aged 9 to 17 years, on two tasks believed to be sensitive to amygdala and orbitofrontal cortex functioning. Fifty-one boys were divided into two groups according to the Psychopathy Screening Device (PSD, P. J. Frick & R. D. Hare, in press) and presented with two tasks. The tasks were the gambling task (A. Bechara, A. R. Damasio, H. Damasio, & S. W. Anderson, 1994) and the Intradimensional/Extradimensional (ID/ED) shift task (R. Dias, T. W. Robbins, & A. C. Roberts, 1996). The boys with psychopathic tendencies showed impaired performance on the gambling task. However, there were no group differences on the ID/ED task either for response reversal or extradimensional set shifting. The implications of these results for models of psychopathy are discussed.     

Self-activation is a two-edged sword: The effects of I primes on cooperation

Two studies examined the influence of I primes on cooperative behavior. Two contrasting hypotheses were tested, using prosocial allocations (Experiment 1) and behavior in a give-some dilemma (Experiment 2) as dependent variables and assessing subjects’ social value orientation. The self-activation hypothesis (Verplanken & Holland, 2002) predicts that social value orientation influences behavior to a stronger degree when activated. That is, proselfs should behave less cooperatively, whereas prosocials should behave even more cooperatively in an I prime condition. The independent self-construal hypothesis (e.g., Gardner, Gabriel, & Lee, 1999) predicts a stronger concern for one’s own outcome and less cooperative behavior for individuals with an activated independent self-construal. In both studies an interaction between priming and social value orientation occurred, supporting the self-activation hypothesis. Implications for the importance of social cognitive processes underlying cooperative behavior, as well as, implications for research on independent vs interdependent self-construals are discussed.     

人际同步对合作行为的促进机制及解释模型

同步作为集体仪式的核心要素, 对群体生存和发展具有重要意义。人际同步是一种特殊的协调行为, 具有锁时锁相的特征。近年来研究发现同步能够促进合作等亲社会行为, 具体的促进机制包括神经生理的激活、社会联结感的增强、认知灵敏度的提高和积极情绪的唤起, 学者们也从不同角度提出了三种不同的解释模型：自我-他人重叠模型、合作加强模型和集体沸腾模型。未来的研究需要进一步剖析同步行为的亲社会功能, 厘清同步效应的调节机制、特异性和普适性。     

The effects of individual differences and task difficulty on inattentional blindness

Most studies of inattentional blindness—the failure to notice an unexpected object when attention is focused elsewhere—have focused on one critical trial. For that trial, noticing the unexpected object might be a result of random variability, so that any given individual would be equally likely to notice the unexpected object. On the other hand, individual differences in the ability to perform the primary task might make noticing more likely for some individuals than for others. Increasing the difficulty of the primary task has been shown to decrease noticing rates for both brief static displays (Cartwright-Finch & Lavie, 2007) and dynamic monitoring tasks (Simons & Chabris, 1999). However, those studies did not explore whether individual differences in noticing arise from differences in the ability to perform the primary task. For our Experiment 1, we used a staircase procedure to equate primary task performance across individuals in a dynamic inattentional blindness task and found that the demands of the primary task affected noticing rates when individual differences in accuracy were minimized. In Experiment 2, we found that individual differences in primary task performance did not predict noticing of an unexpected object. Together, these findings suggest that although the demands of the primary task do affect inattentional blindness rates, individual differences in the ability to meet those demands do not.     

From individual preference construction to group decisions: Framing effects and group processes

Two choice tasks known to produce framing effects in individual decisions were used to test group sensitivity to framing, relative to that of individuals, and to examine the effect of prior, individual consideration of a decision on group choice. Written post-decision reasons and pre-decision group discussions were analyzed to investigate process explanations of choices made by preexisting, naturalistic groups. For a risky choice problem, a similar framing effect was observed for groups and individuals. For an intertemporal choice task where consumption was either delayed or accelerated, naïve groups (whose members had not preconsidered the decision) showed a framing effect, less discounting in the delay frame, opposite to that observed in individuals. Predecided groups showed a non-significant effect in the other, expected direction. In all cases, process measures better explained variability in choices across conditions than frame alone. Implications for group decision research and design considerations for committee decisions are addressed.     

Encouraging Cooperation: Revisiting Solidarity and Commitment Effects in Prisoner's Dilemma Games1

Pre‐play discussion consistently increases cooperation in dilemma interactions. Most explanations of this “cheap‐talk” effect are based on either commitment or group solidarity effects. Because discussion about the upcoming dilemma allows participants to make promises and creates group solidarity, the 2 explanations are often confounded. This paper aims to clarify past results by having participants engage in an unrelated discussion prior to a dilemma interaction. We find that solidarity effects can be induced by minimal group categorizations, but are relatively weak. Discussions involving consequential but unrelated coordination tasks are shown to prime cooperative norms and increase cooperation with both in‐group and out‐group members. Our findings suggest that cheap talk may work for even cheaper reasons than previously thought.     

The effects of collaboration and punishment on prospective memory performance in a group setting

Remembering to perform a delayed intention is termed prospective memory (PM). Often delayed intentions are shared by more than one person; however, there is a dearth of studies examining PM in social settings. We aimed to investigate whether the potential consequences of one's behavior across diverse group settings influence PM performance in event‐ and time‐based tasks. A total of 207 participants were randomly allocated to either an individual, collaborative, or collaborative plus penalty motivation condition and were tested in a 2‐ or 3‐person setting. For the time‐based PM task, participants responded less timely in the individual motivation condition, whereas there was no difference between the collaborative motivation conditions. No significant effects were found for motivation condition on the event‐based task or for group size on PM performance. Analyses of ongoing task performance revealed that participants' attention allocation policies change depending on how individuals prioritize the ongoing and PM tasks.     

The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance

This study assesses the effects of member expertise on group decision-making and group performance. Three-person cooperative groups and three independent individuals solved either an easy or moderately difficult version of the deductive logic game Mastermind. Experimental groups were given veridical performance information, i.e., the members' rankings on prior individual administrations of the task. Control groups were not provided with this information. Results supported the predictions of this study: (1) groups gave more weight to the input of their highest performing members with the group decision-making process being best approximated by post hoc “expert weighted” social decision schemes and (2) groups performed at the level of the best of an equivalent number of individuals.