Teamwork pp 102-135 | Cite as

Cooperation and Communication: Group Identity or Social Norms?

  • Cristina Bicchieri

Abstract

A social dilemma is, by definition, a situation in which each group member gets a higher outcome if she pursues her individual interest, but everyone in the group is better off if all group members further the common interest. Overpopulation, pollution, Medicare, public television, and the depletion of scarce and valuable resources such as energy and fish-rich waters are all examples of situations in which the temptation to defect must be tempered by a concern with the public good. There are several reasons why some individuals might not contribute to the provision of public goods or refrain from wasting common resources. Usually these resources are used by or depend upon very large groups of people for their continued maintenance. It is easy, therefore, for an individual to consider her contribution to a public good or her personal consumption of a common resource as insignificant. Furthermore, in social dilemmas there is a huge difference between the costs and benefits accruing to an individual. Gains go to the individual, but the costs are shared by all. Given the structure of social dilemmas, rational, self-interested individuals are predicted to defect always. Yet almost 50 years of experiments on social dilemmas show cooperation rates ranging from 40 per cent to 60 per cent, and everyday experience shows people making voluntary contributions to public goods, giving to charities, volunteering and refraining from wasting resources.

Keywords

Tate Dition Sonal Allo Univer 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allison, S. T. and N. L. Kerr (1994) ‘Group Correspondence Biases and the Provision of Public Goods’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21, 563–79.Google Scholar
  2. Bartlett, F. C. (1932) Remembering: a Study in Experimental and Social Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  3. Bicchieri, C. (forthcoming) The Grammar of Society: The Nature and Dynamics of Social Norms (New York: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  4. Bicchieri, C. (2000) ‘Words and Deeds: a Focus Theory of Norms’ In Rationality, Rules and Structure, eds. J. Nida-Rumelin and W. Spohn (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers).Google Scholar
  5. Bicchieri, C. (1997) ‘Learning to Cooperate’ In The Dynamics of Norms, eds. C. Bicchieri, R. Jeffrey and B. Skyrms (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  6. Bicchieri, C. (1990) ‘Norms of Cooperation’, Ethics 100, 838–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bornstein, G. (1992) ‘The Free Rider Problem in Intergroup Conflicts Over Step-level and Continuous Public Goods’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62, 597–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouas, K. S. and S. S. Komorita (1996) ‘Group Discussion and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22, 1144–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brewer, M. (1991) ‘The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same Time’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17, 475–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brewer, M. (1979) ‘Ingroup Bias in the Minimal Intergroup Situation: A Cognitive Motivational Analysis’, Psychological Bulletin 86, 307–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brewer, M. B. and R. M. Kramer (1986) ‘Choice Behavior in Social Dilemmas: Effects of Social Identity, Group Size, and Decision Framing’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50, 543–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camerer, C. and R. Thaler (1995) ‘Anomalies: Ultimatums, Dictators and Manners’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 9, 209–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cialdini, R., C. Kallgren and R. Reno (1990) ‘A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: a Theoretical Refinement and Reevaluation of the Role of Norms in Human Behavior’, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 24, 201–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dawes, R. (1980) ‘Social Dilemmas’, Annual Review of Psychology 31, 169–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawes, R., J. McTavish and H. Shaklee (1977) ‘Behavior, Communication, and Assumptions About Other People’s Behavior in a Commons Dilemma Situation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dawes, R., J. Orbell, R. Simmons and A. van de Kragt (1986) ‘Organizing Groups for Collective Action’, American Political Science Review 80, 1171–1185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawes, R., J. Orbell and A. van de Kragt (1988) ‘Not Me or Thee But We: The Importance of Group Identity in Eliciting Cooperation in Dilemma Situations’, Acta Psychologica 68, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dawes, R., A. van de Kragt and J. Orbell (1990) ‘Cooperation for the Benefit of Us&Not Me, or My Conscience’ In Beyond Self-interest, ed. J. Mansbridge (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  19. Estes, W. K. (1986) ‘Memory Storage and Retrieval Processes in Category Learning’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 115, 155–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fiske, S. T. and S. L. Neuberg (1990) ‘A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation’ In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 23, ed. L. Berkowitz (New York: Academic Press).Google Scholar
  21. Fiske, S. T. and S. E. Taylor (1991) Social Cognition (New York: McGraw-Hill).Google Scholar
  22. Hertel, G. and N. L. Kerr (in press) ‘Priming and in-group bias’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Google Scholar
  23. Hertel, G. and N. Kerr (2001) ‘Priming Ingroup Favoritism: The Impact of Normative Scripts in the Minimal Group Paradigm’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 37, 316–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hinkle, S., L. Taylor, D. Fox-Cardamone and K. Crook (1989) ‘Intragroup Identification and Intergroup Differentiation: a Multi-Component Approach’, British Journal of Social Psychology 28, 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hogg, M. A. and J. C. Turner (1987) ‘Social Identity and Conformity: a Theory of Referent Informational Influence’ In Current Issues in European Social Psychology, vol. 2, eds. W. Doise and S. Moscovici (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  26. Insko, C. A. and J. Schopler (1987) ‘Categorization, Competition, and Collectivity’ In Review of Personality and Social Psychology: Group Processes, vol. 8, ed. C. Hendrick (Beverly Hills, Ca.: Sage).Google Scholar
  27. Issac, R. and J. Walker (1988) ‘Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism’, Economic Inquiry 26, 585–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jetten, J., R. Spears and A. S. R. Manstead (1996) ‘Intergroup Norms and Intergroup Discrimination: Distinctive Self-Categorization and Social Identity Effects’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71, 1222–1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jones, E. and R. Nisbett (1972) ‘The Actor and the Observer: Divergent Perceptions of the Causes of Behavior’ In Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior, ed. E. Jones et al. (Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press).Google Scholar
  30. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1973) ‘Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability’, Cognitive Psychology 5, 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kerr, N., J. Garst, D. A. Lewandowski and S. E. Harris (1997) ‘The Still, Small Voice: Commitment to Cooperate as an Internalized versus a Social Norm’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23, 1300–1311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kerr, N. L. and C. Kaufman-Gilliland (1997) ‘“…and besides, I probably couldn’t have made a difference anyway”: Rationalizing defection in social dilemmas’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kerr, N. L. and C. M. Kaufman-Gilliland (1994) ‘Communication, commitment, and cooperation in social dilemmas’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 513–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kiesler, S., L. Sproull and K. Waters (1996) ‘A Prisoner’s Dilemma Experiment on Cooperation with People and Human-like Computers’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kramer, R. M. and M. B. Brewer (1986) ‘Social Group Identity and the Emergence of Cooperation in Resource Conservation Dilemmas’ In Psychology of Decisions and Conflict: Experimental Social Dilemmas, eds. H. A. Wilke et al. (Frankfurt: Verlag Peter Lang).Google Scholar
  36. Kramer, R. M. and M. B. Brewer (1984) ‘Effects of Group Identity on Resource Use in a Simulated Commons Dilemma’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 46, 1044–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mackie, G. (1997) ‘‘Noncredible’ Social Contracts Are Credible: Communication and Commitment in Social Dilemma Experiments’, Mimeo.Google Scholar
  38. Nisbett, R. and T. Wilson (1977) ‘Telling More Than We Can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes’, Psychological Review 84, 231–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Orbell, J., A. van de Kragt and R. Dawes (1991) ‘Covenants Without the Sword: The Role of Promises in Social Dilemma Circumstances’ In Social Norms and Economic Institutions, eds. I. K. Koford and D. J. Miller. (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press).Google Scholar
  40. Orbell, J., A. van de Kragt and R. Dawes (1988) ‘Explaining Discussion-Induced Cooperation’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 811–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Orbell, J. and R. Dawes (1993) ‘Social Welfare, Cooperators’ Advantage, and the Option of Not Playing the Game’, American Sociological Review 58, 787–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pillutla, M. and X. P. Chen (1997) ‘Social Norms and Cooperation: The Effects of Context and Feedback’, Mimeo.Google Scholar
  43. Rosch, E. (1978) ‘Principles of Categorization’ In Cognition and Categorization, eds. (E. Rosch and B. Lloyd. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum).Google Scholar
  44. Sally, D. (1995) ‘Conversation and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas’, Rationality and Society 7, 58–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schank, R. and R. Abelson (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  46. Schopler, J. and C. A. Insko (1992) ‘The Discontinuity Effect in Interpersonal and Intergroup Relations: Generality and Mediation’ In European Review of Social Psychology, vol. 3, eds. W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone, pp. 121–151 (New York: John Wiley).Google Scholar
  47. Schroeder, D. A., T. D. Jensen, A. J. Reed, D. K. Sullivan and M. Schwab (1983) ‘The Actions of Others as Determinants of Behavior in Social Trap Situations’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 19, 522–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sherif, M. (1966) In Common Predicament. (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin).Google Scholar
  49. Tajfel, H. (1982) ‘Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations’, Annual Review of Psychology 33, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tajfel, H. (1973) ‘The Roots of Prejudice: Cognitive Aspects’ In Psychology and Race, ed. P. Watson (Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin).Google Scholar
  51. Tajfel, H. (1970) ‘Experiments in Intergroup Discrimination’, Scientific American 223, 96–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tajfel, H., M. Billig, R. Bundy and C. Flament (1971) ‘Social Categorization in Intergroup Behavior’, European Journal of Social Psychology 1, 149–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tetlock, P. E. and R. Boettger (1989) ‘Accountability: a Social Magnifier of the Dilution Effect’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57, 388–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thaler, R. (1992) The Winner’s Curse: Paradoxes and Anomalies in Economic Life (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
  55. Turner, J. C. et al. (1987) Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
  56. Yamagishi, T., N. Jin and T. Kiyonari (1999) ‘Bounded Generalized Reciprocity: Ingroup Boasting and Ingroup Favoritism’ Advances in Group Processes 16, 161–197.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Cristina Bicchieri 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristina Bicchieri

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations