Abstract
In this paper we argue that in social dilemma situations, group members often tacitly coordinate choice behavior on the basis of rules of fairness. Results are presented on the employment of coordination rules in asymmetric dilemmas. Three different research topics are covered, suggesting that tacit coordination of choice behavior is affected by the justification of asymmetries, the presentation of social dilemmas, and environmental uncertainty. On the basis of these research findings, general suggestions are formulated, as well as suggestions for future research on fairness and tacit coordination.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New York: Academic Press.
Allison, S. T., McQueen, L. R., & Schaerfl, L. M. (1992). Social decision making processes and the equal partitionment of shared resources. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 23–42.
Allison, S. T. & Messick, D. M. (1990). Social decision heuristics in the use of shared resources. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 195–204.
Brewer, M. B. & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 543–549.
Budescu, D. V., Rapoport, A., & Suleiman, R. (1992). Simultaneous vs. sequential requests in resource dilemmas with incomplete information. Acta Psychologica, 80, 297–310.
Frisch, D. & Baron, J. (1988). Ambiguity and rationality. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1, 149–157.
Güth, W. (1994). Distributive justice: A behavioral theory and empirical evidence. In H. Brandstätter & W. Güth (Eds.), Essays on economic psychology (pp. 153–176). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1986). Fairness as a constraint on profit seeking: Entitlements in the market. American Economic Review, 76, 728–741.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–391.
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.
Kelley, H. H. & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley.
Kerr, N. L. (in press). Norms in social dilemmas. In D. Schroeder (Ed.), Social Dilemmas: Social Psychological Perspectives. New York: Pergamon.
Marwell, G. & Ames, R. E. (1979). Experiments on the provision of public goods, I: Resources, interest, group size, and the free-rider problem. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1335–1360.
Messick, D. M. (1995). Equality, fairness, and social conflict. Social Justice Research, 8, 153–173.
Messick, D. M., Allison, S. T., & Samuelson, C. D. (1988). Framing and communication effects on group members’ responses to environmental and social uncertainty. In S. Maital (Ed.), Applied Behavioural Economics (Vol. 2, pp. 677–700). Brighton: Wheatsheaf.
Rapoport, A., Budescu, D. V., Suleiman, R., & Weg, E. (1992). Social dilemmas with uniformly distributed resources. In W. B. G. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. A. M. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 43–57). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Rutte, C. G., Wilke, H. A. M., & Messick, D. M. (1987). The effects of framing social dilemmas as give-some or take-some games. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 103–108.
Samuelson, C. D. & Allison, S. T. (1994). Cognitive factors affecting the use of social decision heuristics in resource-sharing tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 1–27.
Samuelson, C. D. & Messick, D. M. (1986). Inequities in access to and use of shared resources in social dilemmas. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 960–967.
Schelling, T. C. (1980). The strategy of conflict. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
Schwartz-Shea, P. & Simmons, R. T. (in press). Social dilemmas and perceptions: experiments on framing and inconsequentiality. In: D. Schroeder (Ed.), Social Dilemmas: Social Psychological Perspectives. New York: Pergamon.
Sonnemans, J., Schräm. A., & Offerman, T. (1995). Public good provision and public bad prevention (Report No. #TI-95-9). Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute.
Van Dijk, E. & Grodzka, M. (1992). The influence of endowments asymmetry and infonnation level on the contribution to a public step good. Journal of Economic Psychology, 13, 329–342.
Van Dijk, E. & Wilke, H. (1993). Differential interests, equity, and public good provision. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 1–16.
Van Dijk, E. & Wilke, H. (1995). Coordination rules in asymmetric social dilemmas: A comparison between Public Good dilemmas and Resource dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 1–27.
Van Dijk, E., Wilke, H., Wilke, M., & Metman, L. (1995). What information do we use in social dilemmas? Uncertainty and the employment of coordination rules. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Walster, E., Walster, G. W. & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Wit, A. P., Wilke, H. A. M., & Oppewal, H. (1992). Fairness in asymmetric social dilemmas. In W. B. G. Liebrand, D. M. Messick, & H. A. M. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (pp. 183–197). New York: Pergamon Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
van Dijk, E., Wilke, H. (1996). Tacit Coordination and Fairness Judgments in Social Dilemmas. In: Liebrand, W.B.G., Messick, D.M. (eds) Frontiers in Social Dilemmas Research. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85261-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85261-9_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-85263-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-85261-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive