IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ratsoc/v18y2006i4p443-470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Identity and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas

Author

Listed:
  • Brent Simpson

    (University of South Carolina, USA; bts@sc.edu)

Abstract

This article presents a refined explanation of why minimal group identities affect cooperation in social dilemmas. The refined approach builds on key tenets of social identity theory to argue that identity affects cooperation by leadings actors to maximize ingroup outcomes and minimize ingroup inequalities. A key implication of the argument is that social identity is predicted to reduce actors' responses to the ‘greed component’ in social dilemmas (the incentive to ‘free-ride’ on others' cooperation), but that it will not affect actors' responses to the ‘fear component’ (the motivation to avoid being ‘suckered’). These predictions stand in contrast to those of two existing explanations of social identity and cooperation. The three arguments are tested against the results of two new experiments. Overall, the results support the refined approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Brent Simpson, 2006. "Social Identity and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas," Rationality and Society, , vol. 18(4), pages 443-470, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:18:y:2006:i:4:p:443-470
    DOI: 10.1177/1043463106066381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043463106066381
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1043463106066381?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. David Butler, 2012. "A choice for ‘me’ or for ‘us’? Using we-reasoning to predict cooperation and coordination in games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 53-76, July.
    2. Laura Gomez-Ruiz & María J. Sánchez-Expósito, 2020. "The Impact of Team Identity and Gender on Free-Riding Responses to Fear and Cooperation Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-21, October.
    3. Judith Kas & David J. Hardisty & Michel J. J. Handgraaf, 2021. "Steady steps versus sudden shifts: Cooperation in (a)symmetric linear and step-level social dilemmas," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(1), pages 142-164, January.
    4. Kevin Durrheim & Michael Quayle & Colin G Tredoux & Kim Titlestad & Larry Tooke, 2016. "Investigating the Evolution of Ingroup Favoritism Using a Minimal Group Interaction Paradigm: The Effects of Inter- and Intragroup Interdependence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, November.
    5. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2012. "The puzzle of cooperation in a game of chicken: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 65-87, January.
    6. Johannes Weisser, 2012. "Leading by Words in Privileged Groups," Jena Economics Research Papers 2011-066, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    7. Schüssler, Katharina & Schüssler, Michael & Mühlbauer, Daniel, 2018. "Individual Differences and Contribution Sequences in Threshold Public Goods," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 88, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    8. Frank Hindriks, 2012. "Team reasoning and group identification," Rationality and Society, , vol. 24(2), pages 198-220, May.
    9. Aksoy, Ozan, 2019. "Social identity and social value orientations," SocArXiv 83rzv, Center for Open Science.
    10. Lin Tao & Wing-tung Au, 2014. "Values, self and other-regarding behavior in the dictator game," Rationality and Society, , vol. 26(1), pages 46-72, February.
    11. Susann Fiedler & Dshamilja Marie Hellmann & Angela Rachael Dorrough & Andreas Glöckner, 2018. "Cross-national in-group favoritism in prosocial behavior: Evidence from Latin and North America," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(1), pages 42-60, January.
    12. Sebastian Spaeth & Georg von Krogh & Fang He, 2015. "Research Note —Perceived Firm Attributes and Intrinsic Motivation in Sponsored Open Source Software Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 224-237, March.
    13. Yan Chen & Sherry Xin Li, 2009. "Group Identity and Social Preferences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 431-457, March.
    14. Chen, Yan & Li, Sherry Xin & Liu, Tracy Xiao & Shih, Margaret, 2014. "Which hat to wear? Impact of natural identities on coordination and cooperation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 58-86.
    15. Karni Lotan Marcus, 2018. "The Pyramid Fallacy: Self-Organizing Decentralized Open Systems for Sustainable Collective Action," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.
    16. Toshio Yamagishi & Nobuhiro Mifune, 2008. "Does Shared Group Membership Promote Altruism?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 20(1), pages 5-30, February.
    17. Ulf Liebe & Andreas Tutic, 2010. "Status groups and altruistic behaviour in dictator games," Rationality and Society, , vol. 22(3), pages 353-380, August.
    18. Anastasia Peshkovskaya & Tatiana Babkina & Mikhail Myagkov, 2019. "Gender effects and cooperation in collective action: A laboratory experiment," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(3), pages 337-353, August.
    19. Kas, Judith & Hardisty, David J. & Handgraaf, Michel J. J., 2021. "Steady steps versus sudden shifts: Cooperation in (a)symmetric linear and step-level social dilemmas," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 142-164.
    20. Timothy C. Dunne, 2018. "Friend or Foe? A Reversal of Ingroup Bias," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 593-610, August.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:1:p:42-60 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Daniel R. Daneri & Marianne E. Krasny & Richard C. Stedman, 2021. "Place‐based Identity and Framing in Local Environmental Politics," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(2), pages 180-202, March.
    23. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:1:p:142-164 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Bauwens, Thomas & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2018. "Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 612-625.
    25. Thomas Lauer & Bettina Rockenbach & Peter Walgenbach, 2008. "Not just hot air: normative codes of conduct induce cooperative behavior," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 183-197, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:18:y:2006:i:4:p:443-470. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.