Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Group-Based Trust in Social Dilemmas

  • Chapter
New Issues and Paradigms in Research on Social Dilemmas

In a world of strangers, whom should we trust? In the last two decades, there has been increased attention to trust between individuals, trust in organizations, and trust in groups (e.g. Cook, Hardin & Levi, 2005; Gambetta & Hamill, 2005; Kramer, 1999; Molm, 2006; Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 2004). In this chapter we address the question of trust that arises from shared membership in groups in settings which do not provide the opportunity for development of a personal history of obligation between two or more parties, nor information about the reputation of a particular person, nor an organization. Further, the situations we investigate do not involve “assurance”, or encapsulated interest (Hardin, 2001; Yamagishi & Yamagishi, 1994). Rather, we examine those situations where individuals have little information about others, and no guarantees of favorable treatment. In these contexts, we argue that people employ a range of heuristics which are not necessarily less reliable than calculations based on strict individual self interest. We will refer to this as “social assurance”, to distinguish it from institutional assurance and formal sanctions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abrams, D. & Hogg, M. (1990). Social identity theory: Constructive and critical advances. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, J., Dickhaut, J., & McCabe, K. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10, 122–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brann P., & Foddy, M. (1987). Trust and the consumption of a deteriorating common resource. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 615–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (2000). Social identity theory and change in intergroup relations. In D. Capozza & R. Brown (Eds.), Social identity processes (pp. 117–131). London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. (2000). Social identity theory: Past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 745–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchan, N. R., Croson, R. T. A. & Dawes, R. M. (2002). Swift neighbors and persistent strangers: A cross-cultural investigation of trust and reciprocation in social exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 168–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (1997). Progress in behavioral game theory. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11, 167–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (2003a). Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. In: C. F. Camerer & E. Fehr (Eds.), Roundtable series in behavioral economics (pp. 121–135). New York, Sage & Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer, C.F. (2003b). Behavioural game theory: Plausible formal models that predict accurately. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 157–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caporael, L., Dawes, R.M., Orbell, J.M. & van de Kragt, A. (1989). Selfishness examined: Cooperation in the absence of egoistic incentives. Behavioral and Brain Science, 12, 227–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, K.S., Hardin, R. & Levi, M. (2005). Cooperation without trust? New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, K. S., Yamagishi, T., Cheshire, C., Cooper, R., Matsuda, M., & Mashima, R. (2005). Trust building via risk taking: A cross-societal experiment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, C.C. (2003). How to identify trust and reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 46, 260–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R. & Buchan, N. (1999). Gender and culture: International experimental evidence from Trust Games. American Economic Review, 89, 386–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, P. S. (1988). Trust as commodity. In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 49–72). New York: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R.M. 1980. Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 161–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R.M. & Messick, D.M. (2000). Social dilemmas. In: International Journal of Psychology: Special Issue on Diplomacy and Psychology, 35, 111–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckel, C.C, & Wilson, R.K. (2004). Is trust a risky decision? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 55, 447–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foddy, M., & Hogg, M. (1999). Impact of leaders on resource consumption in social dilemmas: The intergroup context. In M. Foddy, M. Smithson, S. Schneider, & M. Hogg (Eds.), Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects (pp. 309–330). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foddy, M., Smithson, M., Schneider, S. & Hogg, M. (Eds.). (1999). Resolvings social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural, and intergroup aspects. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foddy, M., Yamagishi, T., & Platow, M. (2006). Stereotypes and Expectations in group-based trust. Unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foddy, M., & Veronese, D. (1996). Does knowing the jointly rational solution make you want to pursue it? Motivational orientation, information, and behavior in two social dilemmas. In W.B.G. Liebrand and D.M. Messick (Eds.), Frontiers in social dilemma research (pp. 135–155). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. & Hamill, H. (2005). Streetwise. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, R. (1991). Trusting persons, trusting institutions. In: R.J. Zeckhauser, The Strategy of choice, pp. 185–209. Cambridge, Mass: MIJ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, S. A. (2000). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffarth, M. & Foddy, M. (2006). Do economists trust economists? Unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M.A., & Mullin, B.A., (1999). Joining groups to reduce uncertainty: Subjective uncertainty reduction and group identification. In D. Abrams, D. & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity and social cognition (pp. 249–279). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, P. (1997). Transforming social dilemmas: Group identity and cooperation. In: P. Danielson (Ed.), Modeling rational and moral agents (pp. 186–210). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, P. 1998. Social dilemmas: The anatomoy of coopration. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 183–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komorita, S.S., & Parks, C.D. (1996). Social dilemmas. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1999). Trust and distrust in organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 569–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M., & Tyler, T. R. (Eds.). (1996). Trust in organisations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R., & Brewer, M. (1984). Effects of group identity on resource use in a simulated commons dilemma. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1044–1057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. & Goldman, L. (1995). Helping the group or helping yourself? Social motives and group identification in resource dilemmas. In D.S. Schroeder (Ed.), Social dilemmas: Perspectives on individuals and groups (pp. 49–67). Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R., & Wei, J. (1999). Social uncertainty and the problem of trust in social groups: The social self in doubt. In T. Tyler, R. Kramer, & O. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 145–167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, E. (2003). Interaction, emotion, and collective identities. In: P.J. Burke, T.J. Owens, R. Serpe & P.A. Thoits (Eds.), Advances in identity theory and research. pp 231–247. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansbridge, J. (1995). Rational Choice Gains by Losing. Political Psychology, 16 (1), 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messick, D.M. (1999). Alternative logics for decision making in social settings. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 39, 11–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molm, L. (2006). The social exchange framework. In P.J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 24–45). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molm, L.D, Takahashi, N. & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1396–1427l.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. (1966). N-person game theory: Concepts and applications. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1998). A behavioral approach to the rational choice theory of collective action. American Political Science Review 92, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smithson, M., & Foddy, M. (1999). Theories and strategies for the study of social dilemmas. In M. Foddy, M. Smithson, S. Schneider, & M. Hogg (Eds.), Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic, structural and intergroup perspective (pp. 1–14). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., Billig, M., Bundy, R., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization in intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. I: S. Worchel & W.G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., & Reynolds, K.J. (2001). The social identity perspective in intergroup relations: Theories, themes, and controversies. In R. Brown, & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes (pp. 133–152). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange, P.A.M. & Kuhlman, D.M. (1994). Social value orientations and impressions of partner’s honesty and intelligence: A test of the might versus morality effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 126–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lange P.A.M. & Visser, K. (1999). Locomotion in social dilemmas: How people adapt to cooperative, Tit-for-tat, and non-cooperative partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 762–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K., Forgas, J. & von Hippel, W. (2005). The social outcast. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R.K, & Eckel, C.C. (2006). Judging a book by its cover: Beauty and expectations in the trust game. Political Research Quarterly, 59, 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T. (2000). Risk Taking and Trust Building. Unpublished manuscript. Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T., Makimura, Y., Foddy, M., Matsuda, M., Kiyonari, T., & Platow, M.J. (2005). Comparisons of Australians and Japanese on group-based cooperation. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 8, 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T., Kanazawa, S., Mashima, R. & Terai, S. (2005). Separating trust from cooperation in a dynamic relationship. Rationality and Society, 17, 275–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T., & Kiyonari, T. (2000). The group as the container of generalized reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 116–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagishi, T., & Yamagishi, M. (1994). Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 129–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuki, M., Maddux, W.W., Brewer, M.B.B. & Takemura, K. (2005). Cross-cultural differences in relationship- and group-based trust. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 48–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Margaret Foddy

  2. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Robyn Dawes

Authors
  1. Margaret Foddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robyn Dawes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden

    Anders Biel , Daniel Eek , Tommy Gärling  & Mathias Gustafsson , ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Foddy, M., Dawes, R. (2008). Group-Based Trust in Social Dilemmas. In: Biel, A., Eek, D., Gärling, T., Gustafsson, M. (eds) New Issues and Paradigms in Research on Social Dilemmas. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-72596-3_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation