How communication increases interpersonal cooperation in mixed-motive situations

Evidence from two experiments indicates that task-related communication promotes cooperation in mixed-motive situations by activating interpersonal norms related to fairness and trust. In Experiment 1, task-related communication increased cooperation between individuals in a three-choice prisoner’s dilemma game (PDG-Alt) but task-unrelated communication did not. In Experiment 2, cooperation was increased both by sending a task-related message to one’s counterpart and receiving a cooperative task-related message from one’s counterpart. Mediation analyses revealed that task-related communication increased cooperation by activating fairness and trust norms (Experiments 1 and 2). Specifically, whereas sending (relative to receiving) a task-related message increased cooperation by activating fairness norms, receiving (relative to sending) a task-related message increased cooperation by activating trust norms (Experiment 2).     

Motivational bases in mixed-motive interactions: The effects of comparison levels

The relationship between reward level and the basic motives which underlie strategic choices (competitive and noncompetitive) in a mixed-motive game was examined from two theoretical perspectives. The “regret” interpretation proposed by McClintock and McNeel was compared to an approach based upon Thibout and Kelley's concept of comparison level (CL). Two independent variables, CL and Reward, were manipulated by varying the payoff rates in two playing series of the MDG. Initially, 50 iterations were played for high (4¢ per point) or low ($\text{1}\text{5¢}$ per point) incentive to provide subjects with outcomes upon which to base their CL's. The Reward manipulation was introduced in 150 subsequent trials of the game with subjects playing for 8¢ or 1¢ per point. The results show that the absolute magnitude of reward did not influence the extent of cooperative or competitive behavior. On the other hand, the magnitude of reward relative to CL was significantly associated with the degree of cooperative behavior—supra-CL outcomes yielding a higher frequency of cooperative behavior than infra-CL outcomes.     

Cardiovascular changes during social competition in a mixed-motive game.

Male and female subjects played a mixed-motive game against a male confederate under either a 20% cooperative or an 80% cooperative strategy while cardiovascular responses were computer monitored. Females had larger heart rate responses than males during play against the competitive strategy, and the opposite was true during play against the cooperative strategy. Subjects who were more competitive during the game or who scored higher on a coronary-prone (Type A) behavior scale or who reported having an action orientation toward life stress tended to have larger heart rate responses during the game than the remaining subjects. The results draw attention to the importance of covert autonomic responses for understanding overt behavioral choices in mixed-motive games and to the potential utility of this behavioral model for studying the role of psychosocial factors in psychosomatic illnesses.     

Feedback and accountability

This article describes a communications system for planning and carrying out guidance and counseling activities. In the proposed model not only professional team members but also consumers of professional services are regarded as active participants in all phases of guidance, from goal identification through outcome evaluation. The article stresses the importance of an adequate feedback system used by all participants and describes its relationship to counselor accountability.     

Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in organization

Trust in supervisor and trust in organization are argued to be distinct but related constructs, each with its own set of antecedents and outcomes. Empirical field results supported the proposition. Although trust in supervisor and trust in organization were positively and significantly correlated, trust in supervisor was more strongly associated with proximal variables (ability, benevolence, and integrity of supervisor), whereas trust in organization was more strongly correlated with global variables (perceived organizational support and justice). This conclusion held despite the inclusion of proximal variables in the regression on trust in organization and the inclusion of global variables in the regression on trust in supervisor. In addition to the differential antecedents of trust in supervisor and trust in organization, the outcomes for both variables were different. Trust in supervisor was related to increased innovative behavior and satisfaction with supervisor, and trust in organization was related to higher organizational commitment and lower intention to leave. Therefore, the authors provide clear preliminary data on the distinctiveness of trust in supervisor and trust in organization. One implication of this set of results is that organizations should adopt a more holistic approach in building trust, which can be achieved by focusing on the various constituents of the organization and the various levels (e.g., the supervisor level and the organizational level).     

Resisting the temptation to compete: Self-control promotes cooperation in mixed-motive interactions

This article provides a self-control analysis of mixed-motive interactions, including 2-person social dilemmas and bargaining encounters. We propose that mixed-motive interactions pose a self-control conflict between pursuing immediate benefits through competition and pursuing long-term benefits through cooperation. As such, anticipating high (vs. low) barriers to successful outcomes triggers counteractive self-control operations that increase cooperation, so long as people believe that by doing so they can influence others to reciprocate.     

Debriefing and accountability in deceptive research

Debriefing is a standard ethical requirement for human research involving the use of deception. Little systematic attention, however, has been devoted to explaining the ethical significance of debriefing and the specific ethical functions that it serves. In this article, we develop an account of debriefing as a tool of moral accountability for the prima facie wrong of deception. Specifically, we contend that debriefing should include a responsibility to promote transparency by explaining the deception and its rationale, to provide an apology to subjects for infringing the principle of respect for persons, and to offer subjects an opportunity to withdraw their data. We also present recommendations concerning the discussion of deception in scientific articles reporting the results of research using deception.     

Moral accountability and debriefing

What is the ethical significance of debriefing in deceptive research? The standard view of debriefing is that it serves to disclose the deception to the participant and is a means of evaluating and mitigating potential harms that may have resulted from involvement in the research. However, as the article by Miller, Gluck, and Wendler in this issue of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal points out, there has been little systematic attention to the ethics of debriefing, particularly with regard to the role of debriefing in addressing the prima facie moral wrong of deception itself. They argue that in addition to mitigating the harms of deception, debriefing should include an apology to participants for being deceived. In the current paper, I argue that an apology is not morally obligatory in most research contexts. Debriefing should be considered an opportunity to further define the researcher-participant relationship without the need to be remorseful about the research practice.     

Competition and sensemaking in ethical situations

Competition was examined in relation to ethicality. The effect of a competitor being an in‐group vs. out‐group member, the competitor offering uncorroborated or corroborated information, and the impact of the competitor goals were examined. The findings suggest that the way competition is presented has an important influence on how individuals make sense of an ethically ambiguous situation and make ethical decisions. A main effect was found, such that when a competitor offered uncorroborated information, participants made less ethical decisions and used pro‐ethical reasoning strategies less often. An additional main effect was found suggesting that participants made more ethical decisions when working with an in‐group competitor rather than an out‐group competitor. Complex interactive effects were also found and discussed.     

Confidentiality in end-of-life and after-death situations

Confidentiality is one of the foundations on which psychotherapy is built. Limitations on confidentiality in the therapeutic process have been explained and explored by many authors and organizations. However, controversy and confusion continue to exist with regard to the limitations on confidentiality in situations where clients are considering their options at the end of life and after a client has died. This article review these 2 areas and provides some suggestions for future research.     

Self-focusing situations and depression

The author examined the situations in which people turn their attention to the self and investigated differences between depressed and nondepressed persons in self-focusing situations. He developed a Self-Focusing Situation List containing 58 items and administered the list to 436 Japanese undergraduates. He also administered a depression scale to part of the sample (n = 365). A factor analysis extracted 6 factors, and cluster analyses of these 6 factors scores yielded 5 clusters. The participants who preferred self-focusing when alone and avoided self-focusing after positive events (Cluster 5) scored higher on the depression scale than did the participants in Clusters 1, 2, 3, and 4.